Public Health Trust of Miami-Dade County v. Acanda
34 Fla. L. Weekly D 1812 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2009) (September)
The defense made a motion for a directed verdict after it believed the plaintiff had rested based on the fact that the plaintiff had not served the Department of Financial Services as required by section 768.28(7), Florida Statutes. The plaintiff’s attorney realized that such service had, in fact, not been effectuated and served the department the following morning. The jury then returned
with a verdict for the plaintiff. The district court affirmed this verdict, holding that the record was not clear as to whether the plaintiff had rested before the motion was made. It also noted that, even if the plaintiff had rested, the service was effectuated before the judge ruled on an outstanding evidentiary issue. Thus, the motion would have still be properly denied.