Harry Barnett, Appellant, v. Linda Simonet, et al., Appellees. (2026)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Harry Barnett, Appellant, v. Linda Simonet, et al., Appellees.

No. 3D24-1454

Decided: March 31, 2026

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY and GORDO, JJ.

Harry Barnett, in proper person. Kubicki Draper and Sharon C. Degnan (Orlando), for appellees Linda Simonet, Florida Keys Veterinary relief, d/b/a Key West Vets and Pets and Dr. Thomas Householder.

Affirmed. See Diageo Dominicana, S.R.L. v. United Brands, S.A., 314 So. 3d 295, 299 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“[A]n appellate court reviewing the grant of a directed verdict must view the evidence and all inferences of fact in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, and can affirm a directed verdict [ ] where no proper view of the evidence could sustain a verdict in favor of the nonmoving party.” (quoting Owens v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc., 802 So. 2d 315, 329 (Fla. 2001))); Florida E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Shulman, 481 So. 2d 965, 967 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (“An appellate court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the jury on disputed questions of fact. If there is any competent evidence to support a verdict, that verdict must be sustained regardless of the appellate court's opinion as to its appropriateness.”).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network