Opinion · Fllaw Florida

WARD v. OCHOA, 271 So.2d 173 (Fla.App. 4 Dist. 1972)

271 So.2d 173

Type
Opinion
Court
Fllaw Florida
Jurisdiction
Fllaw
Date
1972-07-11
Topic
general

WARD v. OCHOA, 271 So.2d 173 (Fla.App. 4 Dist. 1972) JOHN WESLEY WARD ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. THERESA OCHOA ET AL., APPELLEES. No. 71-324.District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. July 11, 1972.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed WARD v. OCHOA, 271 So.2d 173 (Fla.App. 4 Dist. 1972). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

WARD v. OCHOA,271 So.2d 173(Fla.App. 4 Dist. 1972)
JOHN WESLEY WARD ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. THERESA OCHOA ET AL., APPELLEES.
No. 71-324.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
July 11, 1972.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Okeechobee County, C. Pfeiffer Trowbridge, J.Page 174
R. Edward Campbell, of Jones, Paine Foster, West Palm Beach, for appellants.

John A. Gentry, III, and John Paul Jones, Jr., of Moyle, Gentry, Jones Flanigan, West Palm Beach for appellee-Theresa Ochoa.

Stephen C. McAliley, of Carlton, Brennan McAliley, West Palm Beach, for appellees-Karen Diane Brinkman and Allstate Ins. Co.
OWEN, Judge.
On the authority of the opinion we have filed this date in the case of Maule Industries, Inc. et al. v. Rountree, Fla.App. 1972,264 So.2d 445, we find that the court erred in denying appellants' pretrial and posttrial motions for an order requiring the plaintiff to produce for inspection and copying the agreement which she had entered into before trial with the remaining defendants.

We conclude from our examination of the record that such error did not result in prejudicial harm to appellants during the trial of this cause. Hence, there is no reason to disturb the verdict for the plaintiff or to grant appellants a new trial.

We cannot determine that the error was harmless as pertains to the entry of the judgment. Therefore, the judgment is reversed and this cause remanded for further proceedings to afford appellants the opportunity to apply to the trial court for any setoff to which they may be entitled under the provisions of F.S. Section768.041(2), F.S.A. Thereafter, plaintiff-appellee shall be entitled to have judgment entered in her favor against appellants for the amount of the verdict less any setoff to which appellants shall be found entitled.

Appellants' remaining point on appeal is without merit. Stecher v. Pomeroy, Fla. 1971,253 So.2d 421.

The judgment is reversed and this cause remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.

REED, C.J., and WALDEN, J., concur.