Comparative Negligence

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

• J. P. (Pat) Webb v. Standard OIL Co.
  451 F.2d 284· 5th Cir.· 1971-10-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that even if a quasi master-servant relationship existed, the plaintiff's voluntary assumption of the risk, due to his long-term awareness of the ladder's dangers and the unreliability of assurances of repair, barred recovery.
• BOX v. S. Ga. Ry. Co.
  433 F.2d 89· 5th Cir.· 1970-10-12 ·cited 4×
• Stacey v. Sea-Drilling Corp. & Ins. Co. of N. Am.
  424 F.2d 1272· 5th Cir.· 1970-05-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that cross-examination regarding unreported income from a side business was relevant to the plaintiff's credibility and the extent of his injuries, and that the jury instructions on proximate cause under the Jones Act were adequate.
• Ross v. The Chesapeake & Ohio Ry. Co.
  421 F.2d 328· 6th Cir.· 1970-02-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence supported the jury's finding of employer negligence, and thus the trial court erred in granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• The Grand Union Co. v. Sutter
  230 So. 2d 478· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-01-23 ·cited 4×
• Denver Elmo Sanders v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co.
  216 So. 2d 49· Fla. 4th DCA· 1968-10-25 ·cited 4×
  Denver Sanders appealed a jury verdict finding him and the railroad negligent in a highway-railway crossing accident. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the doctrine of
• Bohlmann v. Booth
  196 So. 2d 507· Fla. 4th DCA· 1967-03-14 ·cited 4×
  In this wrongful death action, the trial judge vacated a jury verdict for the plaintiff by granting a directed verdict for the defendant driver, ruling that the deceased pedestrian was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law. The appellate court reversed, holding tha
• Billingsley v. The Westrac Co. & Donald Earl Adams
  365 F.2d 619· 8th Cir.· 1966-09-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in equating the deceased's ordinary negligence with the truck driver's gross negligence under Arkansas comparative negligence law.
• Judy v. Belk
  181 So. 2d 694· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-01-18 ·cited 4×
  A maritime tort action where a social guest fell into the water while disembarking from a houseboat at night. The court reversed a summary judgment for the defendant, holding that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty to provide safe means of disembarking and that triable issue
• Copeland v. The Greyhound Corp.
  337 F.2d 822· 5th Cir.· 1964-11-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's finding that the bus driver faced a sudden emergency was clearly erroneous, as the circumstances did not constitute an emergency for the following vehicle which had ample time to stop.
• United States v. Bohachevsky
  324 F.2d 120· 8th Cir.· 1963-10-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the conflicting evidence regarding the driver's negligence and the pedestrian's contributory negligence presented issues of fact for the trier of fact, not matters of law.
• The Emp'rs' Liab. Assurance Corp., Ltd. v. Mrs. Alberta Wilkerson Butler
  318 F.2d 67· 5th Cir.· 1963-05-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the doctrine of last clear chance was improperly submitted to the jury because the plaintiff's decedent, not the defendant's employee, had the last opportunity to avoid the accident, and the employee did not discover the peril in time.
• LiMANDRI v. Brasileiro
  316 F.2d 3· 2d Cir.· 1963-04-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's claim that maritime law should have applied was untimely as the case was tried on ordinary negligence without objection.
• Naber v. Scott
  149 So. 2d 365· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-01-23 ·cited 4×
  Lawrence and Clara Naber won a jury verdict against J.T. Scott in a personal injury case arising from a vehicular collision. The trial court granted Scott's motion for a new trial, finding the jury instruction on the last clear chance doctrine was incomplete and likely confusing,
• Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Haywood
  145 So. 2d 533· Fla. 3d DCA· 1962-09-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury that they could not find the railroad negligent for failing to provide warning devices beyond those statutorily required. The court also found no reversible error regarding remarks made by plaintiff'
• Suggs v. Nat'l Homes Corp.
  308 F.2d 105· 5th Cir.· 1962-09-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge did not commit reversible error in refusing to admit certain city ordinances or in giving/refusing jury charges, and that the jury's verdict was supported by the evidence.
• Holmes v. Miss. Shipping Co., Inc.
  301 F.2d 474· 5th Cir.· 1962-03-30 ·cited 4×
  A seaman should not recover damages for injuries caused by the unseaworthiness of the vessel when the seaman's own deficiencies produced that unseaworthiness.
• Everett A. Collins ad litem of the Estate of Elonzo P. Dann, Jr. v. Farley
  137 So. 2d 31· Fla. 3d DCA· 1962-02-01 ·cited 4×
  This case addresses whether the Dead Man's Statute bars testimony from an interested witness (a motorcycle driver) regarding the actions of a deceased driver in an automobile accident. The court held that an automobile collision constitutes a 'transaction' under Florida's Dead Ma
• McQUEEN v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc.
  293 F.2d 590· 8th Cir.· 1961-08-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in submitting the issue of the plaintiff's contributory negligence to the jury under the comparative negligence statute, and that the exclusion of certain evidence regarding a taillight assembly was not reversible error.
• Campbell v. Mrs. Joan A. Barsky
  265 F.2d 463· 5th Cir.· 1959-04-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's findings of fact, including the allocation of fault, were not clearly erroneous and were supported by the evidence.
• Petition OF Diesel Tanker A. C. Dodge, Inc.
  234 F.2d 374· 2d Cir.· 1956-06-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Dodge was at fault for failing to sound a danger signal, and this fault contributed to the collision, and that the owner of the Dodge failed to prove the Master's negligence.
• Martin v. Ceasar Favorato
  79 So. 2d 780· Fla.· 1955-04-27 ·cited 4×
  This is a negligence case arising from a train-truck collision at a railroad crossing. The Supreme Court of Florida reversed a jury verdict and remitted damages award because the trial court failed to properly apply comparative negligence principles despite finding both the truck
• Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Kammerer
  218 F.2d 149· 5th Cir.· 1955-01-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff's attorney's prolonged, inflammatory, and argumentative opening statement and closing arguments, which included inadmissible evidence and prejudiced the jury, constituted reversible error.
• Smith v. Vincent
  204 F.2d 945· 5th Cir.· 1953-06-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the lessors were not liable for the tenant's injury due to a step in the leased premises, and the tenant's own negligence barred recovery.
• Atl. Coast Line R. Co. v. Mitchell
  157 F.2d 880· 5th Cir.· 1946-11-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the deceased's own conduct in attempting to board a moving train was the sole proximate cause of her death, barring recovery.
• Phillips v. Kurn
  145 F.2d 908· 8th Cir.· 1944-12-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that recent Arkansas Supreme Court decisions require submission to the jury of a railroad crossing accident case under the comparative negligence statute, even if the driver is contributorily negligent, provided there is substantial evidence of the railroad's negli
• Wiggins v. Powell
  119 F.2d 751· 5th Cir.· 1941-05-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant railroad, as the question of negligence and comparative negligence should have been decided by the jury.
• Tampa Elec. Co. v. Julien Soule
  84 Fla. 557· Fla.· 1922-11-18 ·cited 4×
  Tampa Electric Company appeals a $15,000 jury verdict in favor of a passenger injured when her dress caught on a loose bolt or nut while alighting from the defendant's street car. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the verdict but reduced the damages to $10,000 through remittitur
• Atlantic Coast Line Railway v. Hobbs
  71 Fla. 109· Fla.· 1916-02-05 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for personal injury and property damage, holding that the jury failed to properly diminish damages in proportion to the plaintiff's contributory negligence as required by statute.
• City of Gainesville v. Rodgers
  377 So. 3d 626· Fla. 1st DCA· 2023-11-29 ·cited 3×
  The law-of-the-case doctrine precluded the trial court from revisiting the sovereign immunity issue after this court's prior affirmance of the order denying summary judgment on that issue. The trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion for a new trial where the jury ve
• Anne McQueen v. Baskin
  377 So. 3d 170· Fla. 2d DCA· 2023-11-17 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court reversed a lower court's dismissal of a defamation lawsuit. The lower court had found the statements made by the defendant on her vlog and website to be non-defamatory opinions and protected speech under Florida's Anti-SLAPP statute. The appellate court disagr
• Tallahassee Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Kemp
  299 So. 3d 538· Fla. 1st DCA· 2021-06-01 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court reversed a jury verdict for a plaintiff who slipped and fell in a hospital, finding insufficient evidence that a foreign substance was on the floor or that the hospital knew about it. The court held that the plaintiff's claims relied on impermissible stacking
• In re Standard Jury Instructions IN Civil Cases & Standard Jury Instructions in Contract & Bus. Cases-Joint Report No. 18-01.
  260 So. 3d 965· Fla.· 2018-12-20 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court approved new standard jury instructions for breach of fiduciary duty cases in civil and contract/business matters. The Court authorized thirteen numbered instructions (451.1-451.13) addressing various aspects of fiduciary duty claims, including elements,
• In re Standard Jury Instructions IN Civil Case-Report NO. 12-01
  130 So. 3d 596· Fla.· 2013-05-30 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court authorized amendments to standard jury instructions in civil cases, making non-substantive technical revisions for clarity and modernization, including corrections to spelling, grammar, cross-references, and gender-neutral language, as well as clarificat
• Claudio v. Misael Regalado, Sr.
  116 So. 3d 451· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-03-01 ·cited 3×
  In this wrongful death and negligence case arising from a fatal auto collision, the appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of the defendant's right to file a counterclaim for contribution against the negligent plaintiff-driver, and held that the defendant should not be
• Douglas-Seibert v. Riccucci
  84 So. 3d 1086· Fla. 5th DCA· 2012-03-09 ·cited 3×
  In a rear-end collision case, the Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed a jury verdict for the defendants and directed entry of judgment for the plaintiff, holding that the rear driver failed to rebut the presumption of negligence applicable in rear-end collisions where the lea
• Marion v. City OF Boca Raton
  47 So. 3d 334· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-10-20 ·cited 3×
  Marion sued the City of Boca Raton for negligent maintenance of a traffic light that malfunctioned multiple times before her accident at a major intersection. The Fourth District reversed summary judgment, holding that governments have an operational-level duty to properly mainta
• Charron v. Birge
  37 So. 3d 292· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-04-09 ·cited 3×
  In a rear-end collision case, the appellate court reversed summary judgment for the lead driver, holding that a passenger in the following vehicle can pursue the lead driver for negligence without being barred by the presumption of negligence that attaches to the following driver
• Gencor Indus., Inc. v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co.
  988 So. 2d 1206· Fla. 5th DCA· 2008-08-15 ·cited 3×
  GenCor Industries appealed from a judgment awarding Fireman's Fund Insurance Company over $1.7 million in breach of contract damages arising from a negligent calibration error that caused an explosion at an asphalt plant. GenCor's defense that contractual risk-of-loss provisions
• Hall v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd.
  888 So. 2d 654· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-07-21 ·cited 3×
  A cruise ship passenger injured after falling down stairs while intoxicated sued Royal Caribbean for breach of its duty to exercise reasonable care. The court reversed the dismissal of the complaint, holding that maritime law imposes a duty on cruise operators to avoid overservin
• Publix Super Mkts., Inc. v. Griffin
  837 So. 2d 1139· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-02-21 ·cited 3×
  Publix Super Markets appeals an order granting the Griffins a new trial and imposing sanctions following a personal injury verdict in which Mrs. Griffin was found 50% negligent. The court reverses both orders, finding that the Griffins waived their right to a new trial by withdra
• Barrientos v. Hyre
  805 So. 2d 981· Fla. 2d DCA· 2001-11-28 ·cited 3×
• Abelardo Angulo v. Matilde Szklaver
  746 So. 2d 562· Fla. 3d DCA· 1999-12-15 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a hospital operating a special curb-to-curb transport service for patients and companions could be liable for injuries sustained by a passenger who was hit by a car after disembarking, due to the hospital's undertaking of special duties beyond the general rule
• Dozier v. The City OF ST. Petersburg & Richard Norell
  702 So. 2d 593· Fla. 2d DCA· 1997-12-03 ·cited 3×
  Lillian Dozier, as personal representative of her deceased husband's estate, appeals the trial court's denial of her motion to tax costs following a jury verdict that awarded her $7,023.25 after apportioning negligence. The appellate court reversed, holding that Dozier was the pr
• Casper v. Melville Corp.
  656 So. 2d 1354· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-06-21 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's denial of a new trial, finding that the jury's verdict was legally inadequate. The jury awarded the plaintiff all her medical expenses but nothing for pain and suffering, which the court held was an inconsistent and unreasonable outcom
• John C. Nordt, III, M.D. v. Wenck
  653 So. 2d 450· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-04-05 ·cited 3×
  Dr. Nordt appeals a jury verdict finding him liable for medical malpractice in failing to prevent, diagnose, and treat thrombophlebitis in his patient Mary Wenck following a leg fracture. The court affirms the judgment, including the jury's finding of 55% physician negligence and
• Mullenix v. United States
  984 F.2d 101· 4th Cir.· 1993-01-12 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Potomac River is a navigable waterway for admiralty jurisdiction purposes, and the accident bore a substantial relationship to traditional maritime activity.
• Greyhound Exhibitgroup, Inc. v. E.L.U.L. Realty Corp.
  973 F.2d 155· 2d Cir.· 1992-08-24 ·cited 3×
  A defaulting party cannot contest liability or introduce general set-offs at a damages inquest, but can contest the amount of damages and present evidence of mitigation.
• Kirsch v. Prekookeanska Plovidba
  971 F.2d 1026· 3d Cir.· 1992-07-30 ·cited 3×
  A shipowner is liable for injuries to longshore workers caused by an obvious hazard only if the shipowner should have expected that the stevedore and its workers could not or would not avoid the danger and conduct operations safely.
• Fla. Mining & Materials Corp. v. Margaret van Antwerp and surviving spouse of John E. Van Antwerp
  601 So. 2d 621· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-06-24 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court erred in applying the apportionment of damages statute to a case that arose before its effective date, thus improperly limiting the judgment against the defendant.