J. In this personal injury action for damages arising from an automobile accident, the jury found that the plaintiff was 90% negligent and that the defendant was only 10% negligent. The trial court granted the plaintiffs motion for a new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. We affirm. See Brown v. Estate of Stuckey, 749 So.2d 490, 497 (Fla.1999) (<HOLDING>). We conclude that the trial court erred in
holding that the applicable rule of procedure vests a successor judge with judicial discretion to review the jury verdict on a motion for new trial on the ground that such verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence where the record clearly discloses that no question of the credibility of the witnesses or the weight to be given to their testimony will require resolution by him holding that the trial courts damages award was against the manifest weight of the evidence because it was based upon inadmissible evidence holding that the trial court can and should grant a new trial if the manifest weight of the evidence is contrary to the verdict holding that a challenge to the weight of the evidence is waived for failure to present the issue first to the trial court holding that the district court should grant a motion for a new trial when the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence or will result in a miscarriage of justice emphasis added