Seely v. Hertz Corp. (231 So. 2d 547, 1970)

PER CURIAM.

We have examined the record and the appellate presentation and find that the presumption of correctness which accompanies orders allowing a new trial has not been overcome. No abuse of discretion having been demonstrated, the order granting a new trial is hereby affirmed. Cloud v. Fallis, Fla. 1959, 110 So.2d 669; City of Fort Pierce v. Cooper, Fla.App.1966, 190 So.2d 12; and Volk v. Goetz, Fla.App. 1967, 206 So.2d 250; 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals, § 317.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, REED, and OWEN, JJ., concur.