Maksad v. Kaskel

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that “[gjenerally, a mistrial or new trial should be granted only when counsel’s arguments are so inflammatory and prejudicial that they deny the opposing party a fair trial”
• eiting to Jeep Corp. v. Walker, 528 So.2d 1203 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)
• “We have carefully read the entire closing argument. While a few words and phrases in Dr. Colletta’s two hour closing argument and one word of the hospital’s closing argument may be objectionable, in the trial court’s view they did not justify a new trial. We agree.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).