#Lost judgment garlic trial

The jury returned verdicts in favor of E & A on its negligence claims against Superior and Trujillo for $24,000 each, and in favor of E & A on Superior's counterclaims.

3d DCA 2003).Į & A proceeded on its claim for negligence, and Trujillo and Superior proceeded on their counterclaims for wrongful eviction and storage charges. Because there were no other claims remaining against Olmo, summary judgment was entered in her favor, which was later affirmed on appeal.

#Lost judgment garlic trial

The trial court granted Superior's summary judgment motion as to 1) civil theft, 2) conversion, and 3) malicious destruction of property. Superior then moved for summary judgment as to E & A's claims. Superior Garlic Int'l, Inc., 864 So.2d 449 (Fla. The trial court awarded defendants a judgment for attorney's fees and costs relating to the abandoned civil theft claim, which was subsequently affirmed by this Court. Superior served its answer and included two counterclaims. After the trial court granted motions to dismiss, E & A filed an amended complaint, alleging 1) civil theft, 2) conversion, 3) malicious destruction of property, and 4) negligence. Because he could not remove all the wires properly in five minutes, Trujillo decided to cut them.Į & A filed a five count complaint for 1) civil theft of property, 2) civil theft of trade secret, 3) conversion and trespass to chattel, 4) malicious destruction of property, and 5) negligence, against Trujillo, Superior, and Nilda Olmo, the vice-president of Superior. When Trujillo showed the police his invoice, he was told that he could take the control panel but was given only five minutes to do so.

There was a disagreement, and the police were called. On August 15, while Almeida was out of town, Trujillo sought to settle for the control panel. The arrangement was to be concluded on August 15, 2000, when Superior cleaned the warehouse. E & A would pay Superior $15,000.00 to keep the control panel, or Superior would pay E & A $3,855.00 as reimbursement for E & A's contribution to the purchase of the panel, in which case Superior would keep the control panel. Trujillo testified that he and Almeida reached an understanding in early August 2000 to settle each parties' out of pocket expenses associated with the joint venture. Superior acceded to the rent amounts while looking for a place to relocate. When Superior failed to vacate, Almeida raised the rents to $1,000.00 for the week of July 31 to August 5, 2000, and $2,500.00 for the week of August 7 to August 13. On June 30, 2000, Almeida gave Superior notice that their rental agreement was terminated and that Superior should vacate by July 15, 2000. 1 In early June 2000, the parties terminated their joint venture. Superior ordered and paid for the control panel used to operate the garlic machine and paid for the wiring of the panel and machine. The testimony was disputed as to whether or not the parties agreed to a one year lease.Īfter the garlic machine was completed, it was shipped and stored in the warehouse occupied by Superior. In October 1999, Superior relocated its business to an empty warehouse owned by E & A. E & A placed an order to purchase a large garlic peeling machine to be used if the joint venture was created. In late 1998, Alfredo Trujillo, President of Superior Garlic, and Juan Almeida, President of E & A, began negotiating a joint venture to form a garlic peeling, packing and selling business. We therefore reverse judgment entered pursuant to the jury verdicts. We affirm the finding against Superior on its counterclaims but conclude that the trial court should have set aside the verdicts against Superior and Trujillo on E & A's claim. Superior Garlic International and Silfredo Trujillo appeal the trial court's final judgment entered pursuant to a jury verdict in favor of plaintiff/counter-defendant E & A Produce Corporation and plaintiffs/counter-defendants, Juan Miguel Almeida and Adria Adrian Almeida. Schatzman & Schatzman, Miami, and Arnold Schatzman, for appellants. E & A PRODUCE CORPORATION, Juan Almeida and Adria Adrian Almeida, Appellees. SUPERIOR GARLIC INTERNATIONAL, and Silfredo Trujillo, Appellants, v. District Court of Appeal of Florida,Third District.