4D09-2638-Stephen Atkinson v. Deborah B. Anderson

State: Florida

Court: Florida Southern District Court

Docket No: 4D09-2638.op

Case Date: 12/14/2011

Plaintiff: 4D09-2638-Stephen Atkinson

Defendant: Deborah B. Anderson

Preview:DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
July Term 2011

STEPHEN ATKINSON, Appellant, v. DEBORAH B. ANDERSON and MICHAEL O. ANDERSON, Appellees. No. 4D09-2638 [December 14, 2011] WARNER, J. A co-tenant of a condominium unit sued th e other co-tenant for ouster from the unit. After the trial court denied a motion for directed verdict, a jury found that the co-tenant had been ousted from the unit and awarded $21,000 in damages. The trial court, however, granted a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, finding that there was no evidence of any communication, by the co-tenant in possession to the ousted co-tenant, that the co-tenant in possession claimed exclusive use. The ousted co-tenant appeals. We reverse, concluding that there was evidence sufficient to support the jury verdict. Although it is usual to begin with a factual background in an opinion, because we must analyze the evidence in light of the law of ouster as well as the standards for granting a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, we begin with a discussion of the legal principles which we must apply to the factual record in this case. On motion for directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict the trial court must "evaluate all facts in evidence and all reasonable inferences that can be drawn from those facts in the light most favorable to the non-movant." Premier Lab Supply, Inc. v. Chemplex Ind., 10 So. 3d 202, 205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). "`Only where there is no evidence upon which a jury could properly rely, in finding for the plaintiff, should a directed verdict be granted.'" Stokes v. Ruttger, 610 So. 2d 711, 713 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (quoting Collins v. School Bd. of Broward Cnty., 471 So. 2d 560, 562 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)). Review of a ruling on motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is de novo.

Dorestin v. Hollywood Imports, Inc., 45 So. 3d 819, 823 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). The task of the District Court of Appeal in reviewing the propriety of an order granting a JNOV is identical to that in which an ordinary motion for directed verdict is involved

Download 4D09-2638.op.pdf