
    Lisa McCANDLESS, Appellant, v. The DIOCESE OF PENSACOLA-TALLAHASSEE, Appellee.
    No. 92-1012.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    April 8, 1993.
    Rehearing Denied May 12, 1993.
    Joseph L. Hammons, Hammons & Whit-taker, P.A., Pensacola, for appellant.
    A.G. Condon, Jr. and Karen 0. Emmanuel, Emmanuel, Sheppard & Condon, Pensacola, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

Appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, seeks review of an order denying her motion for a new trial. Having reviewed the entire record with care, we conclude that appellant has failed to demonstrate that the trial court abused its discretion. Accordingly, we affirm. See Stapleton v. Bisignano, 605 So.2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

AFFIRMED.

ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

ZEHMER, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with written opinion.

ZEHMER, Judge

(Concurring in part and dissenting in part).

I would reverse the damage award and remand for a new trial on damages only because the jury’s • verdict awarded zero dollars for future damages despite the un-contradicted and undisputed evidence of permanent injury to appellant. However, I agree with the majority’s affirmance in respect to the other points on appeal.  