Comparative Negligence

2,627 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Hartley v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co.
  339 So. 2d 630· Fla.· 1976-10-28 ·cited 11×
  The initial assertion of comparative negligence in an appellate brief is insufficient to allow a new trial on that doctrine.
• Bush v. Carpenter Bros., Inc.
  447 F.2d 707· 5th Cir.· 1971-08-20 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the administrator's citizenship controls diversity jurisdiction when beneficiaries merely lend their names to the suit, and that the defendant Merrill's dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction was erroneous under the Mississippi long-arm statute.
• Pyles v. Am. Trading & Prod. Corp.
  372 F.2d 611· 5th Cir.· 1967-01-19 ·cited 11×
  The court held that a seaman cannot recover maintenance and cure for periods he was certified fit for duty and worked, or for periods he received maintenance from another source, or for periods he voluntarily forewent medical treatment.
• D. C. Transit Sys., Inc. v. Slingland
  266 F.2d 465· D.C. Cir.· 1959-04-17 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the jury instruction on res ipsa loquitur was erroneous, requiring reversal of the judgment against Transit, and modified the method of calculating contribution between the two jointly liable defendants.
• Butler v. Watts
  103 So. 2d 123· Fla. 3d DCA· 1958-05-20 ·cited 11×
  Florida East Coast Railway Company appeals a $80,000 jury verdict in favor of employee William Watts for personal injuries sustained while working in a diesel engine tank. The court affirmed the verdict, finding no merit to the appellant's nine points of error, including challeng
• Eaton v. Bass
  214 F.2d 896· 6th Cir.· 1954-08-17 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding defective brakes and the admissibility of evidence concerning company inspection practices were proper.
• Tampa Elec. Co. v. Lottie Fleischaker
  152 Fla. 701· Fla.· 1943-04-06 ·cited 11×
  Tampa Electric Company appeals a jury verdict awarding damages to a 77-year-old widow for injuries sustained when alighting from a street car. The court affirmed the verdict under comparative negligence principles, holding that while the plaintiff was contributorily negligent, th
• State ex rel. James Harris v. The City of Lakeland
  141 Fla. 795· Fla.· 1940-02-16 ·cited 11×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decision, holding that the lower court erred in dismissing a public nuisance claim based on the pleadings alone. The appellate court found the allegations, if proven, were sufficient to establish a public nuisance, and the doctri
• Paralee Middleton v. Don Asher & Assocs., Inc.
  262 So. 3d 870· Fla. 5th DCA· 2019-01-25 ·cited 10×
  Although an open and obvious condition discharges a landowner's duty to warn invitees, it does not discharge the duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition; summary judgment was improper where a factual issue remained regarding whether the landowner should have
• Bongiorno v. Americorp, Inc.
  159 So. 3d 1027· Fla. 5th DCA· 2015-03-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant failed to meet its burden of proving the plaintiff's choice to wear high heels created a foreseeable zone of risk, thus the trial court erred in finding the plaintiff comparatively negligent.
• Zirkelbach Constr., Inc. v. Govin T. Rajan
  93 So. 3d 1124· Fla. 2d DCA· 2012-07-27 ·cited 10×
  Zirkelbach Construction sought certiorari to quash a discovery order compelling production of documents from its liability insurer's claims file. The court granted the petition, holding that the claims file materials were protected work product and that Rajan failed to establish
• ERP Operating Ltd. P'ship v. Shandalyn Sanders
  96 So. 3d 929· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-07-18 ·cited 10×
  ERP Operating, owner of a gated apartment complex, appeals a judgment arising from the murders of two residents. The appellate court reversed, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove proximate causation because there was no evidence of how the assailants gained entry into the
• Smith v. Grove Apts., LLC
  976 So. 2d 582· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-08-22 ·cited 10×
  A tenant injured while trimming overgrown trees in a parking lot appeals summary judgment in favor of his landlord. The court reversed, holding that foreseeability of the tenant's self-help remedy and resulting injuries is a question of fact for the jury, not a matter of law.
• Norfolk Shipbuilding & Drydock Corp. v. Garris
  532 U.S. 811· U.S.· 2001-06-04 ·cited 10×
  A negligent breach of a general maritime duty of care is actionable when it causes death, just as it is when it causes injury.
• Trujillo v. Uniroyal Tire Co.
  753 So. 2d 1256· Fla.· 2000-02-24 ·cited 10×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the Third District Court of Appeal's decision that had reversed a trial court's order for a new trial based on an incorrect legal standard. The Court clarified that trial judges have broad discretion to grant new trials when verdicts are contrar
• Tandra L. Howard v. Perez
  707 So. 2d 845· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-02-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a new trial on liability was improperly granted when the jury unequivocally found the defendant solely liable, but affirmed the new trial on damages due to the jury's inconsistent and inadequate award.
• Ochlockonee Banks Rest. v. Colvin
  700 So. 2d 1229· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-06-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the trial court correctly denied the defendant's motion for a directed verdict on liability, it erred in granting a new trial solely on noneconomic damages, requiring a new trial on all issues due to potential jury compromise.
• Sutton v. Ashcraft
  671 So. 2d 301· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-04-12 ·cited 10×
  Scott Sutton appeals a negligence judgment, arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to apply a 100% collateral source setoff for medical bills paid by his health insurer after he purchased a waiver of the insurer's subrogation rights. The appellate court affirmed, holding
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Penland
  668 So. 2d 200· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-12-06 ·cited 10×
  State Farm appealed a trial court's grant of a new trial in an underinsured motorist case, challenging the exclusion of expert testimony on vehicle occupant positioning, the denial of a motion to disqualify the judge, and the grant of summary judgment on the seat belt defense. Th
• Hawkins v. Champion Int'l Corp.
  662 So. 2d 1005· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-11-14 ·cited 10×
  An employee of a subcontractor suffered a crushed foot when caught in an unguarded pinch point on a conveyor system at the defendant's paper mill. The court reversed summary judgment for the property owner, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding whether the defect was
• Pinellas Cnty. v. Bettis
  659 So. 2d 1365· Fla. 2d DCA· 1995-09-08 ·cited 10×
  Pinellas County appeals a wrongful death judgment in which a jury found the county 80% negligent for a traffic accident involving a county mosquito truck. The court reverses and remands for a new trial because the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on driving whil
• Pollock v. Goldberg
  651 So. 2d 721· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-02-23 ·cited 10×
  Pollock appeals from a directed verdict granted in favor of Goldberg on her counterclaim for negligent operation. The court reversed, holding that in a comparative negligence case with competing affirmative claims, a directed verdict on a counterclaim requires proof that the defe
• Morgan Int'l Realty, Inc. v. Dade Underwriters Ins. Agency, Inc.
  617 So. 2d 455· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-05-04 ·cited 10×
  Morgan International Realty and its president appeal an adverse judgment in a negligence action against their insurance agent for failing to procure a liability policy covering malicious prosecution. The court holds that the insurer had a duty to defend and indemnify compensatory
• Trouette v. Reynolds
  593 So. 2d 1203· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-02-21 ·cited 10×
  A plaintiff appeals a directed verdict dismissing her negligence case after she pulled into the path of a truck at an intersection. The court reverses, holding that even though the plaintiff was negligent, a jury must determine whether the defendant-truck driver failed to exercis
• Haugh v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
  949 F.2d 914· 7th Cir.· 1991-11-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge erred in granting a directed verdict for the defendant, and that a new trial was warranted due to the marshal's improper communication to the jury.
• Black v. Montgomery Elevator Co.
  581 So. 2d 624· Fla. 5th DCA· 1991-06-06 ·cited 10×
  The court addressed whether a plaintiff injured by an elevator could sue the elevator maintenance company for negligence, focusing on the scope of the maintenance company's contractual duties and the lack of privity with the plaintiff.
• Lockley v. Deere & Co.
  933 F.2d 1378· 8th Cir.· 1991-05-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the open and obvious danger rule is not an absolute bar to recovery in strict products liability cases under Arkansas law, and that punitive damages are recoverable in such cases. The court affirmed the district court's denial of motions for judgment notwithst
• LoVUOLO v. Gunning
  925 F.2d 22· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in its application of the Inland Navigational Rules Act by allowing Rule 8 to override other specific rules, which infected its findings on liability and damages.
• Payless OIL Co. & Cigna v. Reynolds
  565 So. 2d 737· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-06-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a workers' compensation carrier's lien on third-party settlement proceeds applies to both past and future benefits, capped by the net tort recovery amount, and the carrier is not entitled to receive the entire lien amount immediately.
• Centennial Ins. Co. v. Fulton
  532 So. 2d 1329· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-11-01 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority erred in granting Centennial another hearing to establish its entitlement to a setoff, finding no support for the majority's conclusion that the amount of workers' compensation benefits was undisputed.
• AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Seacoast Transp. Co.
  528 So. 2d 480· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-07-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit prejudicial error by conducting the charge conference after final arguments or by giving a modified comparative negligence instruction, as the jury found no negligence by the defendant and thus did not reach the issue of comparat
• Rhodes v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co.
  528 So. 2d 459· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-07-05 ·cited 10×
  James Rhodes was injured when a cherry picker boom manufactured by Asplundh fractured and he fell. Rhodes sued for negligence and strict liability based on inadequate warnings about fiberglass deterioration from sunlight exposure. The trial court entered judgment for Asplundh, an
• Parrilla-Lopez v. United States
  841 F.2d 16· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-04 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's award of additional damages for mental anguish and the denial of the motion for a new trial.
• Attridge v. Cencorp Div. OF Dover Techs. Int'l, Inc.
  836 F.2d 113· 2d Cir.· 1987-12-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that post-verdict juror interviews to ascertain the jury's true intent, when there is a suspicion of a mistake in transmitting the verdict, do not violate Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b).
• Kaczmarek v. Allied Chem. Corp.
  836 F.2d 1055· 7th Cir.· 1987-12-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Illinois tort law should apply to the claim against Allied Chemical, Indiana law to the claim against U.S. Steel, and Indiana law to the claim against Ever-Tite. New trials were ordered for Allied Chemical and U.S. Steel, while the judgment for Ever-Tite was a
• Eckert v. Aliquippa & S. R.R. Co.
  828 F.2d 183· 3d Cir.· 1987-09-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred by refusing to submit claims based on violations of the Safety Appliance Acts (SAA) and related regulations to the jury, as such violations can prevent the reduction of damages due to contributory negligence.
• McBRYDE v. Carey Lumber Co.
  819 F.2d 185· 8th Cir.· 1987-05-19 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the trial court did not err in denying motions for a directed verdict, mistrial, or a new trial.
• Gates v. Shell OIL (Shell Offshore
  812 F.2d 1509· 5th Cir.· 1987-03-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was not supported by sufficient evidence, warranting a new trial, but that the evidence could support a finding of negligence, thus reversing the judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Tieche v. Panlener
  504 So. 2d 49· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-03-18 ·cited 10×
  David and Cynthia Tieche appealed a jury verdict finding David 80% negligent in a motorcycle accident and denying Cynthia's loss of consortium claim. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the jury's verdict was supported by competent substantial evidence and that the trial c
• Meyer Morderer and Irene Morderer v. Smith
  502 So. 2d 1341· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-02-25 ·cited 10×
• Chaulk v. Volkswagen OF Am., Inc.
  808 F.2d 639· 7th Cir.· 1986-12-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district judge was not clearly wrong in directing a verdict for Volkswagen on the negligence claim, as there was no credible evidence of negligence.
• Hardy Dotson, III v. Clark Equip. Co.
  805 F.2d 1225· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial and that the comparative negligence issue was not properly before the court due to untimeliness.
• Reese v. Mercury Marine Div. OF Brunswick Corp.
  793 F.2d 1416· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence regarding the dealer's responsibility to warn, nor were its comments prejudicial enough to warrant a new trial.
• Howell v. Bennie Woods
  489 So. 2d 154· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-05-28 ·cited 10×
  The omission of Florida Standard Jury Instruction 6.10 is not fundamental error unless it is clear that damages were awarded that should have been reduced to present value but were not.
• John Sessa Bulldozing, Inc. v. Stauros Papadopoulos
  485 So. 2d 1383· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-04-09 ·cited 10×
  In this motor vehicle negligence case, the trial court granted additur and a conditional new trial after a jury apportioned 70% fault to the plaintiff and 30% to the defendant. The appellate court reversed, holding that trial courts cannot use additur or remittitur to reapportion
• Smith v. Indus. Constructors, Inc.
  783 F.2d 1249· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that prejudgment interest was not warranted on estimated lost earnings and that deducting estimated income taxes from future lost earnings awards is consistent with Mississippi law.
• Coastal Iron Works, Inc. v. Petty RAY Geophysical
  783 F.2d 577· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the 'red letter clause' limiting liability in the ship repair contract was valid and enforceable under maritime law, and that the insurance policy exclusion for failing to meet fire safety standards was ambiguous and should be construed in favor of the insured
• Martin v. Am. Petrofina, Inc.
  779 F.2d 250· 5th Cir.· 1985-12-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury's finding of exposure and defect was supported by sufficient evidence, but erred in reducing the damages by the proportionate fault of settling tortfeasors instead of their pro rata shares.
• Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Vosburgh
  480 So. 2d 140· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-12-11 ·cited 10×
  In this personal injury appeal, the court affirmed liability findings but reversed the damages award of $696,483 because the plaintiff's testimony regarding starting salaries for stewardesses, teachers, and interpreters was inadmissible hearsay that formed the basis for a substan
• Seaboard Coastline R.R. Co. v. Addison
  481 So. 2d 3· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-11-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to give requested jury instructions and that the jury's award of damages, while large, was not improperly influenced by passion or prejudice.