Comparative Negligence

2,641 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 374 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Sohyde Drilling & Marine Co. & Sohyde Drilling & Exploration Co. v. Coastal States GAS Producing Co.
  644 F.2d 1132· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-14 ·cited 47×
  The court held that admiralty jurisdiction was improperly assumed because the incident lacked a substantial relationship to maritime activity, despite the use of a vessel on navigable waters.
• Evans v. S. Holding Corp. & Ins. Co. of N. Am.
  391 So. 2d 231· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-11-25 ·cited 47×
  A landowner has no affirmative duty to maintain private property free of obstructions to preserve motorists' sightlines at public highway intersections, absent a statutory or ordinance violation or encroachment onto public property. Every highway user must exercise reasonable car
• Nat'l BEN Franklin Ins. Co. v. Grover Hall
  340 So. 2d 1269· Fla. 4th DCA· 1976-12-24 ·cited 47×
  The court affirmed the trial court's equitable distribution of a worker's compensation lien, awarding the carrier a small fraction of its claimed amount after considering the employee's comparative negligence and the settlement amount.
• Clark Summer Velsor and Georgia Lee Velsor v. Allstate Ins. Co. & Ronald Miller
  329 So. 2d 391· Fla. 2d DCA· 1976-03-17 ·cited 47×
  A trial court cannot inquire into the subjective reasoning process of a jury to impeach its verdict; polling the jury is the proper procedure if assent is questioned.
• Gulf OIL Corp. v. Panama Canal Co.
  407 F.2d 24· 5th Cir.· 1969-02-05 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the notice-of-claim requirement in § 297 of the Canal Zone Code should be construed reasonably, not strictly, and that the shipowner's actions satisfied the spirit of the requirement given the circumstances.
• Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. McCormick
  59 Fla. 121· Fla.· 1910-01-01 ·cited 47×
  Mrs. McCormick was injured when she stepped into a hole in the waiting room floor of a railroad depot. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the judgment against the railroad companies because the trial court erroneously applied statutory provisions regarding presumptions of neglige
• Rondoe Marie Williams v. Jeannine O. Brochu
  578 So. 2d 491· Fla. 5th DCA· 1991-04-25 ·cited 46×
  Plaintiff Williams appeals a trial court judgment awarding defendant Brochu costs and attorney's fees under Florida's offer of judgment statute (Fla. Stat. § 768.79(1)) after Williams failed to accept Brochu's $2,000 offer and recovered only $1,200 at trial. The appellate court h
• Marietta Wilkinson v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc.
  920 F.2d 1560· 11th Cir.· 1991-01-15 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay statements from a cabin steward and evidence of a subsequent remedial measure, requiring a new trial.
• Easterday v. Masiello
  518 So. 2d 260· Fla.· 1988-01-07 ·cited 46×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Slavin doctrine precludes liability for architects and engineers for personal injuries caused by patent design defects in structures, affirming that contractors, architects, and engineers are relieved of liability for patent defects after t
• Edward M. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Algie F. Vaughn
  491 So. 2d 551· Fla.· 1986-07-17 ·cited 46×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a contractor/manufacturer of paving materials incorporated into a public road is not subject to strict liability for defects in the road, even when the defect becomes patent and observable. The court reversed the district court's decision and r
• Lynch v. Brown
  489 So. 2d 65· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-04-09 ·cited 46×
  Martin Lynch appeals a summary judgment dismissing his negligence claim against Alice Brown, the owner of an apartment building where he allegedly fell from a staircase landing. The court reverses, holding that Lynch's status as an invitee and the existence of factual disputes re
• Albritton v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. & Cheryl Lee Dannels
  382 So. 2d 1267· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-04-11 ·cited 46×
  The Albrittons appealed a jury verdict awarding Tim $4,200 for personal injuries but zero dollars to Jean on her derivative claim for loss of consortium. The court affirmed the jury's findings on permanent disability and comparative negligence but reversed the zero-dollar award t
• Norwilton Murray v. Fairbanks Morse
  610 F.2d 149· 3d Cir.· 1979-11-29 ·cited 46×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the Virgin Islands comparative negligence statute could be applied to strict products liability actions to reduce damages based on plaintiff's fault, and that the jury's damage award was not excessive.
• Clappier v. Flynn
  605 F.2d 519· 10th Cir.· 1979-09-04 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial court erred in submitting two separate verdict forms for negligence and civil rights violations when both claims sought the same compensatory damages, leading to a potential double recovery.
• Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Hayes
  65 Fla. 1· Fla.· 1913-01-15 ·cited 46×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a $25,000 judgment for the wrongful death of a minor child, holding that a father cannot recover damages for the mother's mental pain and suffering under Section 3147 of the General Statutes, and finding the judgment excessive even if such recov
• Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Periera
  705 So. 2d 1359· Fla.· 1998-01-15 ·cited 45×
  This case resolves a conflict between two lower court decisions regarding whether a party's violation of a statute relieves a potential tortfeasor of its duty to an injured party.
• W. Pac. Fisheries, Inc. v. SS President Grant
  730 F.2d 1280· 9th Cir.· 1984-04-11 ·cited 45×·via Comparative Fault
  The court held that the Major-Minor Fault Rule is abolished and that prejudgment interest should be awarded at a rate reflecting market conditions, specifically the yield on 52-week U.S. Treasury bills.
• Emeilia Cann and Charles Cann v. Ford Motor Co.
  658 F.2d 54· 2d Cir.· 1981-08-19 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by phrasing special verdict questions conjunctively, creating an unfair obstacle for the jury, and that Federal Rule of Evidence 407 applies to strict products liability actions.
• Matthews v. Williford
  318 So. 2d 480· Fla. 2d DCA· 1975-09-05 ·cited 45×
  Dr. Matthews appealed judgments for wrongful death and survival damages in a medical negligence case, arguing the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on comparative negligence and by refusing special verdict forms that would apportion negligence among the parties.
• Olympic Towing Corp. v. Nebel Towing Co., Inc.
  419 F.2d 230· 5th Cir.· 1969-07-09 ·cited 45×
  The court held that a vessel owner's right to limit liability under the federal Limitation Act is a personal defense unavailable to its insurer in a Louisiana direct action suit. The court also affirmed the district court's findings regarding liability and the insurer's inability
• Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Wallace
  61 Fla. 93· Fla.· 1911-01-01 ·cited 45×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment against Atlantic Coast Line Railroad for injuries to Mary Wallace struck by a train at a railroad crossing in Live Oak. The court held that a jury cannot determine whether specific safety facilities like gates should have been maintai
• Selma Gross v. Lyons
  721 So. 2d 304· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-05-13 ·cited 44×·via Comparative Fault
  In this personal injury case arising from a rear-end collision, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court's jury instruction regarding a subsequent accident was an incomplete and misleading statement of the law on appo
• Home Depot U.S.A. Co., Inc. v. Taylor
  676 So. 2d 479· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-06-14 ·cited 44×
  Home Depot appealed an order granting a new trial on damages and directing a verdict on comparative negligence in a personal injury case. The court affirmed the new trial but reversed the directed verdict on liability, requiring a new trial on both liability and damages because t
• Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Tillman
  453 So. 2d 1376· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-07-13 ·cited 44×
  This consolidated medical malpractice appeal involves a patient who received a knee prosthesis with mismatched components. The court addresses whether the statute of limitations barred claims against the surgeon, whether the hospital adequately demonstrated standard of care, the
• Ferber v. Orange Blossom Ctr., Inc.
  388 So. 2d 1074· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-09-24 ·cited 44×
  The Ferbers sued Orange Blossom Center for injuries George Ferber sustained when he tripped on a deteriorated ramp at a shopping center. The trial court granted a directed verdict for the defendants, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the plaintiff presented sufficien
• Lauro De Los Santos v. Scindia Steam Navigation Co., Ltd.
  598 F.2d 480· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-01 ·cited 44×
  A shipowner can be held liable for injuries to a longshoreman if the owner knew or should have known of a dangerous condition and failed to exercise reasonable care to protect the longshoreman.
• Vizzini v. Ford Motor Co. c/o C. T. Corp. Sys.
  569 F.2d 754· 3d Cir.· 1977-12-16 ·cited 44×
  The court held that evidence of a decedent's failure to use a seat belt is relevant to the apportionment of damages, even in a strict liability case, and should not be excluded.
• McLAUGHLIN v. Trelleborgs Angfartygs A/B
  408 F.2d 1334· 2d Cir.· 1969-01-30 ·cited 44×·via Comparative Fault
  A shipowner is entitled to indemnity from a stevedore employer when the stevedore's employee is contributorily negligent, even if the shipowner also contributed to the injury.
• Aliene Alessi and John Alessi v. Farkas
  118 So. 2d 658· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-03-02 ·cited 44×
  In this personal injury action arising from an automobile collision, the appellate court reversed the trial court's directed verdict for defendants and reinstated the jury verdict for plaintiffs, holding that the trial court improperly withdrew the contributory negligence issue f
• Hawk v. Seaboard Sys. R.R., Inc.
  547 So. 2d 669· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-07-05 ·cited 43×
  Parents and representatives of two young children killed in a train-automobile collision appeal a trial court's remittitur order reducing wrongful death damages. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by substituting its judgment for the
• Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Lively
  465 So. 2d 1270· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-03-05 ·cited 43×
  Florida Power and Light Company appeals a jury verdict finding it negligent for failing to mark static lines on electrical transmission towers that an airplane struck during an emergency landing attempt 8.7 miles from Miami International Airport. The appellate court reversed, hol
• George H. Gele (Mrs. Patricia Kellog Gele v. Wilson
  616 F.2d 146· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-28 ·cited 43×·via Comparative Fault
  The court held that the district court's allocation of comparative fault was not clearly erroneous and that interest on the judgment against one party properly ran from the date of the second judgment on remand, as the appellate mandate did not specify an earlier date.
• ROY v. Star Chopper Co., Inc.
  584 F.2d 1124· 1st Cir.· 1978-10-03 ·cited 43×
  The court affirmed the district court's rulings on choice of law, jury instructions, and evidentiary matters, finding no reversible error in the application of Rhode Island strict liability law or the handling of third-party claims.
• Lubrano v. Royal Netherlands S.S. Co.
  572 F.2d 364· 2d Cir.· 1978-02-15 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the district judge erred in directing a verdict for the shipowner, as ambiguous testimony presented a jury question regarding the ship's officer's actions.
• Porter v. United States
  258 F.2d 685· D.C. Cir.· 1958-06-26 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the admission of the first statement was not an error, and while the second statement's admissibility was debatable, it was not material to the outcome of the trial. Therefore, the conviction is affirmed.
• Skovgaard v. THE Vessel M/V Tungus
  252 F.2d 14· 3d Cir.· 1957-12-23 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the New Jersey Wrongful Death Act does not impose liability on a shipowner for unseaworthiness without negligence, nor does it impose a stricter duty than New Jersey tort law for providing a safe workplace when the dangerous condition is obvious and known to t
• Allen v. Powell
  152 Fla. 443· Fla.· 1943-03-02 ·cited 43×
  In this wrongful death action, a jury awarded only $5,000 damages for the death of a railroad employee, having previously awarded $15,000 in an earlier trial. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and granted a new trial, concluding that the jury's verdict was inadequate and irratio
• Tampa BAY Water v. HDR Eng'g, Inc.
  731 F.3d 1171· 11th Cir.· 2013-09-23 ·cited 42×
  Tampa Bay Water sued HDR Engineering and Barnard Construction after a newly constructed reservoir developed large cracks in its embankments. TBW alleged HDR's defective design caused the damage through excess pore pressure, while HDR argued Barnard's construction techniques cause
• Amerace Corp. v. Stallings
  823 So. 2d 110· Fla.· 2002-06-13 ·cited 42×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts regarding whether plaintiffs in personal injury cases may recover prejudgment interest from the date of a jury verdict until entry of final judgment. The Court held that interest does not accrue until judgment
• Joia v. Jo-Ja Serv. Corp.
  817 F.2d 908· 1st Cir.· 1987-05-01 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the employer's motions for directed verdict and judgment n.o.v. were properly denied, and that the water boat owner was not entitled to limit its liability due to privity and knowledge of the unseaworthy condition. Joint and several liability applies under mar
• Dorine Herndon v. Seven BAR Flying Serv., Inc.
  716 F.2d 1322· 10th Cir.· 1983-09-02 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the trial court's disposition, agreeing that the defendant's liability was limited to its apportioned share of damages, despite a settlement agreement.
• Darel K. Hardin v. Manitowoc-Forsythe Corp.
  691 F.2d 449· 10th Cir.· 1982-10-05 ·cited 42×·via Comparative Fault
  The court held that while Kansas law permits comparison of fault with 'phantom parties' in strict liability cases, the trial court abused its discretion by including Lummus Company as a phantom party without sufficient evidence or fair opportunity for the plaintiff to defend. How
• Johnson v. William C. Ellis & Sons Iron Works, Inc.
  604 F.2d 950· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-18 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the repairer (Ellis) was not liable as it did not create or aggravate the dangerous condition and had no duty to warn of obvious dangers. The court reversed the judgment for the manufacturer (Long Reach) due to trial errors, including improperly directing a ve
• SOL Walker & Co. v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co.
  362 So. 2d 45· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-07-26 ·cited 42×
  This case addresses whether a judgment exonerating a defendant in a personal injury action has res judicata effect on a subsequent contribution claim brought by the plaintiff's other defendant. The court held that a directed verdict in favor of Walker in Warder's injury suit prec
• Charline Hamilton v. Jess Chaffin
  506 F.2d 904· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-15 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the City of Booneville is immune from suit under Section 1983 and that the jury's verdict on the remaining claims was supported by the evidence and proper instructions.
• Bashaw v. Dyke
  122 So. 2d 507· Fla. 1st DCA· 1960-08-02 ·cited 42×
  A homeowner sued a builder for negligence after suffering severe injuries when she attempted to move heavy sheetrock placed by the builder's workers during construction. The Florida appellate court reversed the jury verdict for the plaintiff, holding that the builder was not negl
• Berti v. Compagnie de Navigation Cyprien Fabre (American Stevedores, Inc.
  213 F.2d 397· 2d Cir.· 1954-05-26 ·cited 42×
  The court held that a vessel owner's duty of seaworthiness is non-delegable and that the owner is not liable for the stevedore's operational negligence if the stevedore had exclusive control. The court also held that the owner was entitled to indemnity from the stevedore.
• Wilkinson v. Pensacola & Atl. R.R. Co.
  35 Fla. 82· Fla.· 1895-01-01 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed a lower court's ruling, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove the specific cause of action alleged in his declaration. The plaintiff claimed a railroad fireman negligently threw wood from a train, but the evidence did not support this specific allegation.
• Aubin v. Union Carbide Corp.
  177 So. 3d 489· Fla.· 2015-10-29 ·cited 41×·via Comparative Fault
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the Third District Court of Appeal's decision to overturn a jury verdict against Union Carbide in an asbestos mesothelioma case, holding that Florida continues to apply the Second Restatement's consumer expectations test for design defects in st
• Jackson M. Troxler v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.
  717 F.2d 530· 11th Cir.· 1983-10-17 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the defendant waived its statutory immunity defense by failing to plead it affirmatively and that the evidence supported the jury's negligence verdict. The court also held that the indemnification agreement did not require the contractor to indemnify the owner