Comparative Negligence

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

• Abrisch v. United States
  359 F. Supp. 2d 1214· M.D. Fla.· 2004-11-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the FAA air traffic controllers' failure to provide accurate and timely weather information was a cause of the crash, but the pilot's own negligence also contributed.
• Leonte Martinez and Sandra Martinez v. Poly-Ply Corp.
  883 So. 2d 327· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-08-25 ·cited 2×
  Martinez sued Poly-Ply for injuries from a forklift accident at Poly-Ply's facility. The jury found Poly-Ply 56% liable and Martinez 44% comparatively negligent. The trial court granted Poly-Ply's motion for new trial based on alleged prejudice from the trial bifurcation, but the
• Keybank Nat'l Ass'n v. Int'l Fin. Bank
  874 So. 2d 664· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-05-12 ·cited 2×
  KeyBank appeals a summary judgment entered against it in favor of International Finance Bank on claims of misrepresentation and gross negligence arising from dishonored checks. The court reversed and remanded for trial, finding that factual disputes regarding comparative negligen
• Cousins Club Corp. v. Silva
  869 So. 2d 719· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-04-07 ·cited 2×
  A nightclub was sued for negligence after a nineteen-year-old boxer suffered severe brain injuries during a promotional boxing event. The court affirmed the $12 million jury award to the injured boxer but reversed the parents' consortium damages award and addressed setoff issues
• Eliza Stephenson Meyer v. Thompson
  861 So. 2d 1256· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-12-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a fraudulent concealment claim, based on a seller's duty to disclose material defects not readily observable, is not a negligence claim to which comparative fault applies.
• Osler v. Collins
  870 So. 2d 65· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-11-14 ·cited 2×
  In this automobile accident case, the trial court improperly reduced the plaintiff's judgment by subtracting PIP insurance benefits paid by the defendant's insurer. The appellate court held that because the insurance policy incorporated Michigan law allowing a reimbursement lien,
• Wallent v. Fla. Power Corp.
  852 So. 2d 339· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-08-13 ·cited 2×
  Joseph Wallent, a 79-year-old man, was injured when electrical wires in a circuit breaker box shorted while he attempted to reset the breaker at his friend's mobile home after receiving instructions from a Florida Power employee. The Second District Court of Appeal reversed the t
• Dourado v. Ford Motor Co.
  843 So. 2d 913· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-02-19 ·cited 2×
  Barbara Dourado, as personal representative of her deceased husband's estate, appealed a wrongful death judgment against Ford Motor Company for a defective seatbelt, seeking to increase the damages award. The court affirmed the judgment and all damage determinations, rejecting he
• Walker v. Bozeman
  243 F. Supp. 2d 1298· N.D. Fla.· 2003-02-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Florida law does not permit setoff of settlement proceeds against non-economic damages and that attorney's fees and costs under the offer of judgment statute are recoverable against the estate but not the survivors in a wrongful death action.
• STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CIVIL CASES (NO. 02-1)
  828 So. 2d 377· Fla.· 2002-09-12 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court approved amendments to standard civil jury instructions, including new instruction MI 8.1 on negligently supplied false information under Restatement § 552, modifications to instruction MI 8 on misrepresentation claims, and an amended instruction 3.3a on
• Cleveland Johnson v. LaSALLE
  774 So. 2d 760· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-11-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a defendant seeking a setoff for PIP payments must use an itemized verdict to ascertain economic damages, as a general verdict does not allow for such a determination.
• STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CIVIL CASES (NO. 99-2)
  777 So. 2d 378· Fla.· 2000-08-17 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court approved five proposed amendments and one new instruction to the Florida Standard Jury Instructions for Civil Cases, relating to deposition testimony, personal injury damages, misrepresentation claims, and breach of contract.
• Smith v. Butterick
  769 So. 2d 1056· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-08-09 ·cited 2×
  In a personal injury case arising from a two-vehicle automobile accident, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a judgment awarding damages to the plaintiff passenger and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court erred in excluding evidence supporting a seat
• Risley v. Chart House, Inc.
  756 So. 2d 143· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-03-08 ·cited 2×
  Eva Risley suffered a hip fracture and subsequent knee replacement after slipping on landscaping stones at the Chart House restaurant. The jury found both parties negligent, awarded Risley her medical expenses but awarded only $1,000 each for past and future pain and suffering. T
• Charles Bernard, Ltd. v. Tobias Jewelry Ltd.
  751 So. 2d 711· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-02-16 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a jury verdict awarding damages to a jewelry company for breach of contract after its samples were stolen from a hotel safe. The court held that the hotel's posted sign limiting insurance to $10,000 did not cap its total liabili
• John Caddell Constr. Co. & Edward H. Cain v. Mendez
  742 So. 2d 425· Fla. 3d DCA· 1999-09-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court properly denied setoffs for PIP benefits and a prior class action settlement, affirming the verdict.
• Healthsouth Sports Med. & Rehab. Ctr. OF Boca Raton, Inc. v. Roark
  723 So. 2d 314· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-11-25 ·cited 2×
  HealthSouth and its physical therapist appealed a medical malpractice judgment, challenging the trial court's directed verdict on comparative negligence and its exclusion of a disclosed witness. The Fourth District reversed on the comparative negligence issue, finding sufficient
• Auto Builders S. Fla., Inc. v. Bucci
  709 So. 2d 1381· Fla.· 1998-05-21 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a Fourth District Court of Appeal decision that reversed a trial court judgment in a personal injury case involving negligence at a construction site. The Court answered certified questions regarding whether a jury verdict awarding future medica
• Bonita Conquest v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co.
  773 So. 2d 71· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-04-06 ·cited 2×
  Bonita Conquest appealed a directed verdict in favor of Auto-Owners Insurance Company on her statutory claim for unfair claim settlement practices under Florida Statutes section 624.155. The court affirmed, holding that Conquest failed to present sufficient evidence of causation
• STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS-CIVIL CASES (NO. 98-1)
  711 So. 2d 1· Fla.· 1998-04-02 ·cited 2×
  This is an administrative order by the Florida Supreme Court approving revised standard jury instructions for civil cases. The Court authorized publication of model jury charges and verdict forms designed to guide trial courts in instructing juries on comparative negligence, dama
• Stein v. CIGNA Ins. Co.
  744 So. 2d 462· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-12-31 ·cited 2×
  Sheldon Stein sued his insurer under uninsured motorist coverage for injuries from an automobile accident. A jury found him 25% negligent, the other driver 75% negligent, awarded $200,000 for past pain and suffering, and found a permanent injury, but awarded no future damages. Th
• Charlemagne v. Adassa and Alston Francis
  700 So. 2d 157· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-10-15 ·cited 2×
  A tenant's invitee sued landlords for negligence after tripping on defective carpet in a leased apartment. The trial court erred by instructing the jury on a statutory defense from the Residential Tenancies Act that applies only to statutory warranty claims, not common law neglig
• McCARTHY v. Garcia Menendez Enters. Inc.
  693 So. 2d 75· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-04-30 ·cited 2×
• Mitchell v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins.
  678 So. 2d 418· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-07-26 ·cited 2×
  Family exclusion clauses in automobile insurance policies are not void as contrary to Florida law or public policy.
• Valerie and Russell Hammond v. Sharon and John Mulligan, Sr.
  667 So. 2d 854· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-01-19 ·cited 2×
  In this personal injury case arising from a motor vehicle collision, the appellate court reversed a jury verdict for the defendants and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court erred by allowing inadmissible hearsay evidence regarding the plaintiff's statements to h
• Benita Soto and Gilberto Soto v. Dolgen Corp., Inc.
  665 So. 2d 1086· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-12-13 ·cited 2×
  Mrs. Soto slipped and fell in a Dollar General store, suffering a severe shoulder fracture requiring two surgeries and resulting in permanent 40% loss of shoulder function. The trial court awarded only $5,000 for past pain and suffering and $5,000 for future intangibles, which th
• Martin Cnty. v. Indiantown Enters., Inc.
  658 So. 2d 1144· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-08-02 ·cited 2×
  A governmental entity is not liable for damages arising from its employees' provision of incorrect information regarding the extension of a demolition order when the claimant bypassed formal remedies and relied on informal assurances.
• Safety Kleen Corp. v. Ridley
  666 So. 2d 913· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-04-06 ·cited 2×
  Safety Kleen Corporation appeals a jury verdict awarding damages to Harold Ridley for injuries from an automobile accident, arguing the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury that violation of Florida's seat belt statute constitutes evidence of negligence. The appella
• Stufflebean v. The Ohio Cas. Ins. Co.
  645 So. 2d 136· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-11-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an order granting partial summary judgment is not appealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv) if it does not determine liability in favor of the party seeking affirmative relief.
• Dewitt Excavating, Inc. v. Walters
  642 So. 2d 833· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-09-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in calculating damages by improperly applying joint and several liability principles and setoffs after the total damages exceeded $25,000.
• Ramos v. Ambu-Car OF Dade Cnty., Inc.
  627 So. 2d 1255· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-12-07 ·cited 2×
  Maria Ramos appeals a trial court order that reduced a jury's $20,000 personal injury verdict to $800 based on comparative negligence and seat belt non-use defenses. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the defendant failed to establish that the seat belt w
• Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Jacinta R. Massani
  627 So. 2d 1199· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-11-30 ·cited 2×
• Univ. OF Miami v. All-Pro Athletic Surfaces, Inc.
  619 So. 2d 1034· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-06-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to enter a judgment against the defendants jointly and severally for the indivisible economic injury suffered by the University.
• Wentzka v. Gellman
  991 F.2d 423· 7th Cir.· 1993-04-19 ·cited 2×
  A federal district court abused its discretion by retaining jurisdiction over state law claims after dismissing all federal claims, absent extraordinary circumstances.
• WED Transp. Sys., Inc. v. Beauchamp
  616 So. 2d 146· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-03-30 ·cited 2×
  WED Transportation Systems appeals a judgment finding it 40% liable for contribution in a motor vehicle accident where a WED bus driver signaled an oncoming driver to turn left in front of the bus, and that driver collided with a third vehicle. The court affirms, holding that a s
• Hood v. Knappton Corp. Inc.
  986 F.2d 329· 9th Cir.· 1993-02-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admiralty principle shifting the burden of proof to a drifting vessel is not superseded by Federal Rule of Evidence 301 and remains applicable in this circuit.
• Bhd. Shipping Co., Ltd. v. ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. & City of Milwaukee
  985 F.2d 323· 7th Cir.· 1993-02-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding the city's negligence.
• Fleck v. KDI Sylvan Pools, Inc.
  981 F.2d 107· 3d Cir.· 1992-12-04 ·cited 2×
  The Third Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. The court held that the statute of repose barred the claim against the pool seller, Sylvan. It also found that Hoffinger waived its right to appeal the directed verdict in the indemnification action against it. T
• Tinsley v. Sea-Land Corp.
  979 F.2d 1382· 9th Cir.· 1992-11-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that post-judgment interest on a reduced damage award should be calculated from the date of the original judgment when the original award was not unsupported by evidence and was only reduced due to comparative negligence.
• Bathsheba Gonzalez v. G.A. Braun, Inc.
  608 So. 2d 125· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-11-10 ·cited 2×
  In this products liability case, Gonzalez appeals from a trial court's order granting a new trial and entering a corrected judgment reflecting comparative negligence findings. The appellate court reversed the new trial order but affirmed the comparative negligence judgment, holdi
• Sylvio J. Pitasi and Joan Pitasi v. The Stratton Corp.
  968 F.2d 1558· 2d Cir.· 1992-07-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred by excluding evidence of subsequent remedial measures and by failing to provide jury instructions regarding the season pass, requiring a new trial.
• Curtis v. Bulldog Leasing Co., Inc.
  602 So. 2d 611· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-07-01 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge believes the jury should have considered the seat belt issue and, if reversed, the case should be remanded to strike the damage reduction related to it, not require a new trial.
• Morgan v. United States
  968 F.2d 200· 2d Cir.· 1992-06-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that 38 U.S.C. § 351 requires the setoff of administrative benefits against the total amount of an FTCA judgment, not solely against the portion representing lost earnings.
• Fidelia Alexander v. Bird Rd. Ranch & Stables, Inc.
  599 So. 2d 229· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-05-19 ·cited 2×
  Dr. Alexander, a veterinarian, sued Bird Road Ranch for injuries sustained when thrown from a horse. The trial court admitted hearsay testimony from an insurance investigator regarding the ranch owner's accident description, which the court erroneously used to support a comparati
• Tillwick v. Sears
  963 F.2d 1097· 8th Cir.· 1992-05-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not plainly err in giving a contributory negligence instruction in a strict liability case, as Nebraska law permits such a defense under its comparative negligence statute.
• James Carmel for the Bankruptcy Estate of Emil Stavriotis and Judith Stavriotis v. Clapp & Eisenberg, P.C.
  960 F.2d 698· 7th Cir.· 1992-04-06 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the judgment for the appellees, holding that there was a reasonable basis in the record for the jury's verdict and that the defense counsel's remark in closing argument did not constitute reversible error due to the appellant's failure to object.
• Prudhomme v. Tenneco OIL Co.
  955 F.2d 390· 5th Cir.· 1992-03-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by allowing the plaintiffs to proceed on a strict liability theory after the plaintiffs had withdrawn their motion to amend their complaint to add such a claim, thereby misleading the defendant and causing prejudice.
• Dillinger v. Caterpillar, Inc.
  959 F.2d 430· 3d Cir.· 1992-02-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of seat belt non-use was harmless error, and the admission of evidence regarding the plaintiff's failure to use an alternative braking system was not grounds for reversal.
• Fitzmaurice v. Smith
  593 So. 2d 1197· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-02-19 ·cited 2×
  Florida appellate court affirmed directed verdict on comparative negligence defense and exclusion of workers compensation evidence, but reversed and remanded for new trial on damages because trial court improperly granted additur without a motion from the prevailing party.
• Salvador v. State
  601 So. 2d 227· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-01-29 ·cited 2×
  Two defendants convicted of leaving the scene of an accident with injury were ordered to pay restitution for damages. The court reversed, holding that under State v. Williams, restitution requires a significant relationship between the damages and the punished offense, not merely