77 So. 3d 768
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2011Background
- Co-tenant sued the other co-tenant for ouster from unit 704 in Port Condominium.
- Trial court denied a directed verdict; the jury found ouster and awarded $21,000.
- Trial court granted JNOV, concluding no evidence of exclusive possession communicated to the ousted cotenant.
- On appeal, reviewing de novo standard for JNOV and directed verdict, the court must view evidence in light favorable to non-movant.
- Barrow v. Barrow defines ouster as exclusive possession communicated to the cotenant.
- Fact record shows the Andersons moved into unit 704, limited Atkinson to a bedroom, and changed locks, contrary to prior use and agreement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there is sufficient evidence of ouster. | Atkinson: evidence shows exclusive possession by Andersons communicated. | Andersons: no clear, communicated exclusive possession. | Yes; jury could find ouster based on communication and exclusive use. |
| Whether JNOV was proper given the evidence. | Sufficient evidence prevents JNOV. | No substantial evidence of ouster. | JNOV improper; reversal and remand for verdict reinstatement. |
Key Cases Cited
- Barrow v. Barrow, 527 So.2d 1373 (Fla. 1988) (ouster requires communicated exclusive possession)
- Stokes v. Ruttger, 610 So.2d 711 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992) (directed verdict standard; view evidence in favor of non-movant)
- Collins v. School Bd. of Broward Cnty., 471 So.2d 560 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) (directed verdict standards; evidence sufficiency test)
- Premier Lab Supply, Inc. v. Chemplex Ind., 10 So.3d 202 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (motion for directed verdict deference to non-movant evidence)
- Dorestin v. Hollywood Imports, Inc., 45 So.3d 819 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (de novo review of JNOV; standard of appellate review)
- Johnson v. Swerdzewski, 935 So.2d 57 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (reviewing conflicts in evidence in non-movant favor)