ELLIOT PETTIGREW, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
GEORGE LIPPITT, DOING BUSINESS AS THE LIPPITT TIRE COMPANY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court reversed a trial court's directed verdict for an employer in a personal injury case, finding that there was sufficient evidence to support a jury verdict for the employee.
Yes, the trial judge erred in directing a verdict for the defendant because there was sufficient evidence presented that could have supported a verdict for the plaintiff.
“In the record brought here for review, there is an abundance of evidence to have sustained a verdict for the plaintiff below, and the trial judge erred in taking the questions of fact from the decision of 'the jury by peremptorily instructing them to return a verdict in favor of the defendant below.”
This quote explains the court's reasoning for reversing the lower court's decision.
An employee sued his employer for personal injuries sustained from the explosion of a compressed air tank in the employer's auto repair shop. After bo…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Peremptory Instruction cases and more on FLexlaw
[*535] Taylor, J.- —
-The plaintiff in error as plaintiff below instituted Ms action for damages against the defendant in error, wbo was his employer, for personal injury received by him in the explosion of a compressed air tank used by the defendant in his automobile repair shop. Upon the conclusion of the testimony for both parties at. the trial, the trial judge, on motion of the defendant, peremptorily instructed the jury to return a verdict in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiff. For review of the judgment entered on this verdict the plaintiff below comes here by writ of error. In the record brought here for review, there is an abundance of evidence to have sustained a verdict for the plaintiff below, and the trial judge erred in taking the questions of fact from the decision of 'the jury by peremptorily instructing them to return a verdict in favor of the defendant below. Gravette v. Turner, 77 Fla. 311, 81 South. Rep. 476.
Browne, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.