TRIAL COURT ERRED BY GRANTING PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR JNOV AFTER JURY RETURNED A COMPLETE DEFENSE VERDICT – – REVERSIBLE ERROR NOT TO EVALUATE THE EVIDENCE IN A LIGHT MOST FAVORABLE TO THE NON-MOVING PARTY
Carrasquillo v. Metzler, 49 Fla. L. Weekly D91 (Fla. 4th DCA Jan. 3, 2024):
After a defense verdict, the plaintiff moved for judgment notwithstanding the verdict as to both defendant doctors in a medical malpractice case.
Despite the conflicting evidence presented at trial as to the standard of care, the court concluded that the facts reflected that the defendant doctors failed to recognize the urgency for a chest CT scan. Yet the plaintiff’s own expert acknowledged that the MRI report described the condition as “chronic” as opposed to “acute,” and that there were no words on the report such “urgent” or “stat.”
Simply put, the expert’s testimony together with the defendant doctors’ denials created conflicts in the evidence which only the jury–and not the trial court–could resolve. Accordingly, by granting the motion for JNOV as to one of the doctors, the trial court committed a reversible error in failing to resolve the conflicts in evidence in a light most favorable to the non-moving party.