Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

WRIGHT CARLTON, Plaintiff in Error, vs. F. T. VAUX, Defendant in Error.

DAVIS, J. —

In this case the evidence does not show liability of the defendant below for the entire amount of the damages recovered. Where the evidence does not show liability for the amount of damages awarded, and is so lacking in essential particulars that are reasonably appropriate for an estimate of the damages which might be recoverable from the defendant, that the court cannot with satisfactory certainty determine what would be a proper remittitur, the judgment must be reversed for a new trial. Southern Utilities Co. v. Davis, 83 Fla. 366, 92 So. 683; Plant City v. Muse, 71 Fla. 126; 70 So. 1005; A. C. L. R. Co. v. Brash, 73 Fla. 478, 74 So. 503.

Reversed.

WHITFIELD, P.J., AND TERRELL, J., concur.

BUFORD, C.J., AND BROWN, J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

ELLIS, J., dissents.

ELLIS, J., dissenting:

There is sufficient evidence to support the verdict as to Carlton's liability as joint tort feasor.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

CARLTON v. VAUX
(Aug 3, 1931)