Comparative Negligence

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

• Hutchinson v. Raymond Chris Fouts with Will annexed of the Estate of Doris (Cozad) Lorraine Fouts
  349 F.2d 946· 8th Cir.· 1965-08-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or for a new trial, as there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find the defendant negligent and the plaintiff not more than slightly contributorily ne
• Alford v. NEW York Cent. R.R. Co.
  339 F.2d 1019· 7th Cir.· 1964-12-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the admission of photographs taken at a later date, and the jury instructions regarding contributory negligence and the absence of comparative negligence, were not prejudicial errors.
• Little v. Sullivan
  166 So. 2d 697· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-08-04 ·cited 6×
  Appellants Carl and Vera Little appealed a judgment rendered on a jury verdict in favor of Joseph Sullivan in a motor vehicle collision case. The appeal raised three issues: whether the trial court abused its discretion in reinstating a dismissed action, whether the court erred i
• Dixon v. Serodino, Inc.
  331 F.2d 668· 6th Cir.· 1964-05-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in admitting limited evidence of the plaintiff's marital history and in refusing certain jury instructions, and that the jury's findings on damages were within its province.
• Chicago v. Carlton Kinard
  299 F.2d 829· 8th Cir.· 1962-03-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff's contributory negligence was established as a matter of law and was at least equal to, if not greater than, the defendant's negligence, thus barring recovery.
• Crosby v. Meredith
  300 F.2d 323· 4th Cir.· 1962-02-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence of negligence to allow the case to go to the jury.
• Abrams v. Gresham
  131 So. 2d 207· Fla. 3d DCA· 1961-06-12 ·cited 6×
  Plaintiff Abrams, a passenger injured in an automobile accident, appealed from a directed verdict for defendants entered after he presented his evidence. The court reversed, holding that conflicting evidence about negligence and proximate cause precluded the trial court from dire
• Emil H. Moschkau v. Sears
  282 F.2d 878· 7th Cir.· 1960-10-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was no credible evidence to support a finding that Sears was causally negligent in its warning, and the plaintiff's injuries resulted from his own wrongful use of the product.
• Jones v. Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co.
  117 So. 2d 234· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-01-06 ·cited 6×
  Eva Jones brought a wrongful death action against Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and its engineer for her husband's death when his automobile was struck by a train at a railroad crossing in Arcadia, Florida. The jury returned a verdict for the defendants, finding that the d
• Willis v. Pa. R.R. Co.
  269 F.2d 549· 4th Cir.· 1959-08-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting or excluding evidence or in its jury instructions, and that the jury's verdict was supported by the evidence.
• The Greyhound Corp. v. Mrs. Annie M. Wilson
  250 F.2d 509· 5th Cir.· 1957-12-10 ·cited 6×
• Carter v. Schooner Pilgrim Inc.
  238 F.2d 702· 1st Cir.· 1956-11-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to allow a jury to consider claims of negligence and unseaworthiness, and therefore a directed verdict was improper.
• United States v. Smith
  220 F.2d 548· 5th Cir.· 1955-03-31 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding ample evidence to support the findings of unseaworthiness, negligence, and the deceased seaman's lack of negligence.
• Brunk v. Chicago
  207 F.2d 354· 8th Cir.· 1953-10-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant, as there was substantial evidence that could support a jury verdict for the plaintiffs under Nebraska law.
• Loftin v. Crowley's Inc.
  150 Fla. 836· Fla.· 1942-06-23 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld railroad-specific statutory liability provisions against a constitutional challenge that they violated equal protection by treating railroads differently than motor vehicle carriers. The Court held that the legislature may constitutionally classif
• Wm. R. Kenan, Jr. v. Austin
  146 Fla. 389· Fla.· 1941-03-14 ·cited 6×
  Sherman Austin was injured in a crossing accident at a busy Miami railroad intersection and recovered a $15,000 verdict. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding the evidence of damages speculative and determining that both parties' negligence shou
• Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Hamlett
  81 Fla. 872· Fla.· 1921-06-06 ·cited 6×
  A railroad passenger sued for injuries sustained when a train car was suddenly jerked and moved with violent force, throwing him against the car's interior. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a $2,000 judgment for the passenger, holding that while passengers assume risks incident
• Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. English
  78 Fla. 211· Fla.· 1919-07-30 ·cited 6×
  Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company appeals a jury verdict awarding John P. English $775 for damages to his motor vehicle when a railroad freight car struck it at a street crossing in Pensacola. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that there was substanti
• Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Frederitzi
  77 Fla. 150· Fla.· 1919-02-04 ·cited 6×
  Florida East Coast Railway Company appealed a judgment for wrongful death damages awarded to Frederitzi for the death of his minor son struck by the railroad's train at a crossing. The court affirmed the judgment, holding that although the deceased was negligent, the evidence sup
• Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Yarborough
  61 Fla. 307· Fla.· 1911-01-01 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment awarding Yarborough $130 plus interest for loss of logs that lodged against a railroad bridge. The court held that while the railroad had a duty to manage drift around its bridge, Yarborough's own negligence in failing to promptly rem
• Jacksonville Elec. Co. v. August Hellenthal
  56 Fla. 443· Fla.· 1908-06-01 ·cited 6×
  Jacksonville Electric Company appeals a jury verdict for damages in favor of Hellenthal, who was injured by a street car. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the judgment, holding that the trial court properly instructed the jury on the equal rights of street cars and pedestrians a
• The Savannah v. Cosens
  46 Fla. 237· Fla.· 1903-06-01 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's decision, holding that a plaintiff could not recover damages for a horse killed by a train. The court found the plaintiff's own negligence and the horse's actions were the proximate cause of the injury, not the railroad's alleged
• Leon v. Pena
  274 So. 3d 410· Fla. 4th DCA· 2019-06-12 ·cited 5×
  Mary Leon sued her landlords for injuries sustained from falling on a cracked sidewalk in her condominium complex that she had traversed for nearly ten years. The trial court granted summary judgment for the landlords based on the open and obvious danger doctrine and Leon's assum
• Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Martin
  262 So. 3d 769· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-12-12 ·cited 5×
  In this Engle wrongful death tobacco case, the appellate court addressed whether the post-1999 version of Florida's punitive damages statute, which bars successive awards, applied to the plaintiff's claim. The court held that because the decedent's tobacco-related lung cancer man
• Black v. Mery Cohen
  246 So. 3d 379· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-04-25 ·cited 5×
  An objection to comments made during voir dire regarding insurance cannot serve as a basis for granting a new trial when the objecting party failed to move for mistrial, accepted a curative instruction without expressing dissatisfaction, and accepted the jury without reservation,
• Kellner v. David
  140 So. 3d 1042· Fla. 5th DCA· 2014-05-30 ·cited 5×
  Appellants appeal a jury verdict in a negligence case arising from a motorcycle-SUV collision, challenging the exclusion of the defendant driver's testimony about accident scene measurements and the amount of damages awarded for loss of future earning capacity. The court affirmed
• In re Standard Jury Instructions IN Civil Cases-Report NO. 12-02
  115 So. 3d 208· Fla.· 2013-05-23 ·cited 5×
  The Florida Supreme Court adopted amended standard jury instructions for civil cases, including revisions to instruction 201.2 on participant introduction, Section 700 on closing instructions, and instruction 801.2 on read-back of testimony, to clarify procedures for introducing
• Ortiz v. Misael Regalado, Sr.
  113 So. 3d 57· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-03-01 ·cited 5×
  In this negligence case arising from a fatal auto collision, the Florida Court of Appeal affirmed that a co-owner of a vehicle cannot claim the statutory damage cap under section 324.021(9)(b)(3) when the other co-owner negligently operates their jointly-owned vehicle, but revers
• Reffaie v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
  96 So. 3d 1073· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-09-05 ·cited 5×
  In this slip-and-fall negligence case, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a jury verdict that found the plaintiff 80% comparatively negligent, holding that defense counsel's improper closing argument mischaracterizing an expert witness's relationship with person
• In re Standard Jury Instructions IN Civil Cases-Report NO. 09-10 (Products Liability)
  91 So. 3d 785· Fla.· 2012-05-17 ·cited 5×
  The Florida Supreme Court granted preliminary approval for revised standard jury instructions in products liability cases, with specific modifications to proposed instructions while rejecting others and referring several proposals back to the Committee for further revision before
• Schein v. Ernst & Young, LLP
  77 So. 3d 827· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-01-11 ·cited 5×
  Appellants Schein and Results Technologies appealed a judgment in their favor, challenging the trial court's denial of their motion for directed verdict on Ernst & Young's comparative negligence defense. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed on the narrow issue of whether
• Est. of Miller Ex Rel. Miller v. Thrifty Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc.
  609 F. Supp. 2d 1235· M.D. Fla.· 2009-04-10 ·cited 5×
  The court determined that Florida law, specifically the Fabre defense, does not apply to the apportionment of liability in this case because Florida lacks a sufficient interest. The court found that South Africa and Oklahoma have interests in applying their respective laws.
• Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Denis Cardoso
  922 So. 2d 301· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-02-15 ·cited 5×
  Cardoso sued Miami-Dade County for eighteen arrests while lawfully peddling flowers with a valid license, claiming false arrest and negligent training. The jury awarded him damages on eight false arrest claims and a negligent supervision claim, but the appellate court reversed th
• Mental Health Care, Inc. v. Stuart
  909 So. 2d 371· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-08-03 ·cited 5×
  Mental Health Care, Inc. appeals a jury verdict finding it liable for a case manager's negligent failure to warn a psychiatric hospital about a patient's violent propensities before the patient attacked a nurse. The court reversed, holding that a case manager at a community menta
• Target Stores v. Corinne Detje
  833 So. 2d 844· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-12-18 ·cited 5×
  Target Stores appeals a jury verdict in favor of Corinne Detje for injuries sustained in a slip-and-fall incident caused by a red-painted wooden cart stopper outside the store. The appellate court affirms the judgment, finding that although plaintiff's counsel made two improper c
• Shearon v. Sullivan
  821 So. 2d 1222· Fla. 1st DCA· 2002-07-26 ·cited 5×
  In this personal injury case arising from a 1998 automobile accident, the Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's exclusion of a treating neurologist's expert testimony regarding future medical care and costs, holding that such testimony—though qualified
• Anderson v. King
  817 So. 2d 1102· Fla. 2d DCA· 2002-06-14 ·cited 5×
  Anderson appeals a trial court order denying his request for attorney's fees and costs under Florida's offer of judgment statute. The court mistakenly compared the jury's verdict to Anderson's offer rather than the final net judgment, and reversed, finding Anderson entitled to fe
• STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CIVIL CASES (99-1)
  778 So. 2d 264· Fla.· 2000-07-06 ·cited 5×
  This is a Florida Supreme Court order approving proposed amendments to the Florida Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases. The Court authorized eight proposals for new and revised jury instructions covering topics such as documentary evidence, demonstrating aids, juror note-ta
• Bradley Factor, Inc. v. United States
  86 F. Supp. 2d 1140· M.D. Fla.· 2000-02-08 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the economic loss rule does not bar the plaintiff's fraud in the inducement claim because it is an independent tort, and that the defendant breached its warranty as a matter of law.
• Woodard v. Armenian Cultural Ass'n OF Am., Inc.
  724 So. 2d 669· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-01-20 ·cited 5×
  In this premises liability case, the appellate court reversed a jury verdict for a property owner, holding that the trial court erred by determining as a matter of law that the injured plaintiff was a trespasser when material facts about her location were disputed, and that such
• Ryder Truck Rental, Inc. v. Partington
  710 So. 2d 575· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-02-04 ·cited 5×
  In this negligence and products liability case arising from a vehicle collision, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's directed verdict on comparative negligence but reversed the summary judgment dismissing punitive damages claims, finding sufficient evid
• Gerald F. Horton, M.D. v. Channing
  698 So. 2d 865· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-07-16 ·cited 5×
  In this medical malpractice wrongful death case, the appellate court affirmed the jury's finding of liability against three physicians for failing to timely diagnose a patient's Ewing's sarcoma but reversed and remanded regarding economic damages and attorney's fees, holding that
• Clare Snoozy v. United States Gypsum Co.
  695 So. 2d 767· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-04-23 ·cited 5×
  Clare Snoozy, as representative of her deceased husband's estate, appealed a jury verdict in an asbestos-related wrongful death case against United States Gypsum Company. The court affirmed the liability finding but reversed the award of zero damages to the minor children, findin
• Leonard v. Wakulla Cnty.
  688 So. 2d 440· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-02-28 ·cited 5×
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether a dangerous condition on a county ramp was readily apparent and whether the appellant knew the extent of the danger, precluding summary judgment.
• Kahle v. Prewitt
  673 So. 2d 121· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-05-08 ·cited 5×
  In this automobile injury case, the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to allow defendants to present evidence on whether they had the required security to qualify for a no-fault threshold defense, and by failing to provide proper jury instructions on the permanency th
• Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Lenz
  669 So. 2d 271· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-01-19 ·cited 5×
  Anheuser-Busch appealed a jury verdict finding it 70% negligent for an exploding beer bottle that injured an employee, even though the jury also found the bottle had no defect when placed on the market. The court reversed, holding that the jury's inconsistent findings—finding neg
• Tierney v. Black Bros. Co.
  852 F. Supp. 994· M.D. Fla.· 1994-05-19 ·cited 5×
  The court held that it erred in allowing the jury to consider the employer's comparative negligence due to a lack of proximate cause evidence, and therefore assigned 100% of the liability to the defendant.
• Childers v. Lawrence Schachner, M.D.
  612 So. 2d 699· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-01-26 ·cited 5×
  In a wrongful death action involving a minor child, a jury award to the non-negligent parent on a survivor's claim cannot be reduced by the comparative negligence attributed to the negligent parent.
• Fed. Ins. Co. v. NCNB Nat'l Bank OF N.C.
  958 F.2d 1544· 11th Cir.· 1992-04-24 ·cited 5×
  An insurance company that paid an employer's losses from employee embezzlement sued two banks as subrogee and assignee of the employer. The employee obtained payment of corporate checks lacking required signatures by obtaining oral authorization from a bank clerk, then embezzled
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Banaszak
  561 So. 2d 465· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-05-23 ·cited 5×
  Allstate Insurance appeals a trial court order compelling arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, arguing that the threshold issue of coverage eligibility must be decided by the court before damages can go to arbitration. The court agrees and reverses, holding that whether an