Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...1st DCA 1959) (reiterating that lay witness can identify person’s handwriting if witness is sufficiently familiar with handwriting to form reliable opinion but familiarity could not have been acquired for purpose of litigation); Charles W. Ehrhardt, Evidence, § 901.4, at 1057 (2011 ed.) (explaining that section 92.38, Florida Statutes, which allows jury comparison of disputed writing with genuine exemplar, has been construed to permit jury comparison only where expert or skilled witness has testified that disputed writing and exemplars were written by same person)....

...In fact, plaintiff's counsel did not even cross-examine the defendant on this testimony. Counsel for defendant then offered to introduce these checks as samples of Mrs. Farnham's signature, which was denied by the trial court. We agree with the statement of the trial court that under F.S. § 92.38, F.S.A., "it is the province and responsibility of the court to determine the genuineness of the standard offer and the court must be satisfied that it is genuine before admitting it to be used as a standard." While we hold that it is a corr...

...ed the signatures as genuine. The defendant then placed in evidence some forty exhibits of the plaintiffs' signatures on other documents the genuineness of which were admitted by the plaintiffs. On the basis of these proven standards and pursuant to Section 92.38, F.S....

...1 of that year. Although subsequent revisions of the rules did not incorporate a similar provision, we do not consider such omission as reviving the common law principle. Other aspects of the common law principle have been abrogated by statute (now Section 92.38, F.S....

...in support. Rutledge did not file any affidavits or other evidence establishing that Mary Dias's signatures on the unrelated mortgage or on her answer to Wells Fargo's complaint were genuine, nor did he request a stipulation from Wells Fargo. See § 92.38, Fla....

§ 55, which as carried forward now appears as § 92.38 Fla.Stat, F.S.A.), reading as follows: “Comparison

*230The basis for our conclusion begins with Section 92.38, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., which has been restricted

PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See section 92.38, Florida Statutes (1985)....

received in compliance with the requirements of § 92.38 Fla.Stat., F.S.A. See Barron v. State, Fla.App

...by comparing it with any other signature or writing; however in the interest of promoting the administration of justice in cases where comparisons of disputed writings were properly made, the harsh rule of the common law was abolished by what is now section 92.38 of the Florida Statutes. [3] Chem. Corn Exch. Bank & Trust Co. v. Frankel, 111 So.2d 99, 100-01 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959); see Thompson v. Freeman, 111 Fla. 433, 149 So. 740, 743 (1933). Section 92.38 provides: Comparison of a disputed writing with any writing proved to the satisfaction of the judge to be genuine, shall be permitted to be made by the witnesses; and such writings, and the evidence of witnesses respecting the same, may...

...14 Fla.Jur. 642, 643, Fraud and Deceit, § 83. . 37 C.J.S. Fraud § 1, p. 207. . Boyd v. Gosser, 78 Fla. 64 , 82 So. 758, 761 . . Security Trust Co. v. Calafonas (Fla.1953) 68 So.2d 562, 563, 564 . . Davidson v. Bell (Ark.1969) 447 S.W.2d 338, 340 . . F.S. § 92.38, F.S.A.

Am.Jur.2d Evidence § 810 (1967), and Fla.Stat. § 92.-38. Appellants, on the other hand, urge that a party