Legal Opinion

Manis v. Prudhomme

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 29, 1973No. 72-280PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Appellant applied for a continuance of the trial in a personal injury action because a key witness had been subpoenaed and failed to appear. Critical to the disposition of the appeal is a showing in the record that the witness was in fact served with a witness subpoena. Such subpoena and return of service is not in our appellate record and, hence, we are unable to determine that the trial court actually abused its discretion in denying appellant’s request for a continuance. The duty of affirmatively demonstrating error is upon the aggrieved party, the appellant. City of North Miami v.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gulf Heating & Refrigeration Co. v. Iowa Mut. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1966
  2. Latin American Benefit Center, Inc. v. JohstoneauxDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1972
  3. City of North Miami v. BenjaminDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1961

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Tuttle v. Miami Dolphins, Ltd.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  2. Ball v. PappDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975
  3. Blasco v. KrantzDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1974

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API