JAMES W. BRAY
v.
ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION
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 affirmed a lower court's judgment for the defendant railroad company, holding that the plaintiff's own negligence barred recovery. The court found that the plaintiff's unfamiliarity with the road and the alleged blending of colors did not overcome the established legal principle that a plaintiff's negligence can preclude recovery.
The plaintiff's negligence, as a matter of law, precludes recovery. The arguments presented do not distinguish this case from established precedents that bar recovery due to the plaintiff's own negligence.
“It is contended here that the case at bar is not ruled by Kimball v. A.C.L. R.R. Co., 132 Fla. 235, 181 So. 533, and similar cases, because: (1) the car was driven by a person not familiar with the highway where it intersected the railroad track at Apopka; and (2) the blending of the colors of the highway and the cars of the defendant then obstructing the crossing prevented the plaintiff below from seeing the freight train in time to avoid the collision.”
This quote outlines the plaintiff's main arguments on appeal, attempting to distinguish their case from prior unfavorable precedents.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff was involved in a collision with the defendant railroad company's train at a crossing. The plaintiff argued that the driver's unfamiliar…
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 Contributory Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from a final judgment for the defendant below entered upon demurrer by the Circuit Court of Orange County, Florida. It is contended here that the case at bar is not ruled by Kimball v. A.C.L. R.R. Co., 132 Fla. 235, 181 So. 533, and similar cases, because: (1) the car was driven by a person not familiar with the highway where it intersected the railroad track at Apopka; and (2) the blending of the colors of the highway and the cars of the defendant then obstructing the crossing prevented the plaintiff below from seeing the freight train in time to avoid the collision.
We have examined the authorities cited in the brief to sustain this contention, but we are forced to the conclusion that the negligence of the plaintiff, as a matter of law, in the case at bar precludes his recovery. The judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed.
BUFORD, C. J., TERRELL, CHAPMAN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Forrest H. AKE and Mittie AKE v. Birnbaum, 156 Fla. 735 (Fla. 1945)…[*743] Section 768.03, sufra, but under Section 320.59, sufra, commonly known as our guest statute. Counsel of record and the trial court are in accord on this point. It is a survival and not a wrongful death action. The case of McDougald v. Imler, 153 Fla. 619, 15 So. (2nd) 418, was a suit brought under the guest or gross negligence statute (Section 320.59, F.S. 1941). Lee M. Couey was a guest of Earl Rains in an automobile traveling from High Springs, Florida, to Gainesville and return, and the car was d…
-
Margaret Ann Super Mkts., Inc. v. MRS. Esther K. Scholl and Raymond S. Scholl, 159 Fla. 748 (Fla. 1947)…y ranged from $25 to $35 per month, for injuries including right fracture of skull, fracture of right shoulder, sprained ankle and lacerations of right leg, requiring doctor and hospital bills of $261.55, was excessive by $2,000. McDougald v. Imler, 153 Fla. 619, 15 So. (2nd) 418. Verdict for $4,500 for personal injuries, sustained by a housewife 38 years of age, consisting of two fractures of the pelvis and one of the femur of the right hip and which did not result in permanent injuries was excessive. Thr…
-
Haverty Furniture Co. v. McKESSON & Robbins, Inc., 154 Fla. 772 (Fla. 1944)…oyee, whose cause of action had been assigned under the statute to the plaintiff employer and the action brought thereon before his death? We think not. The above question was not discussed and probably not raised in the case of McDougald v. Imler, 153 Fla. 619; 15 So. (2nd) 418, cited by appellee, but that was a case where, in an action for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident the plaintiff died pending the second appeal here and his daughter was appointed administratrix and was substitut…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Kimball v. Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co., 132 Fla. 235 (Fla. 1938)