Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

444 So. 2d 85

Daon Corp. v. Blankenstein

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 31, 1984

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1984-01-31

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 2011

1 state decisions

Relies on 359 So. 2d 430 - Wackenhut Corp. v. Canty · A & P Bakery Supply & Equipment Co. v. H. Hexter & Son, Inc. · 394 So. 2d 1143 - Rodewald v. Lawton

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1984-01-31

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM,

¶1The nature and effect of the order granting the plaintiff’s motion for mistrial was to grant a new trial. See A & P Bakery & Equipment Co. v. H. Hexter & Son, Inc., 149 So.2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963). The trial court’s order did not specify the grounds upon which the new trial was granted, as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530(f). We therefore relinquish jurisdiction to the trial court for the entry of an order stating the reasons for granting the new trial. See Wackenhut Corp. v. Canty, 359 So.2d 430 (Fla.1978); Rodewald v. Lawton, 394 So.2d 1143 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).

¶2Remanded for further proceedings.

/444/so2d/85 · .json · Public domain