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

• de Cruz-Haymer v. Festival Food Mkt., Inc.
  117 So. 3d 885· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-07-24 ·cited 30×
  A Florida appellate court reversed summary judgment in a premises liability case involving a trip-and-fall on an unsecured mat at a supermarket entrance, holding that while the obvious danger doctrine may discharge a landowner's duty to warn, it does not discharge the duty to mai
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Curran
  83 So. 3d 793· Fla. 5th DCA· 2011-12-02 ·cited 30×
  State Farm appealed a summary judgment awarding Robin Curran the full $100,000 uninsured/underinsured motorist policy limits despite her breach of the policy's compulsory medical examination (CME) requirement. The Fifth District affirmed, holding that while Curran breached the CM
• Cardenas v. Miami-Dade Yellow CAB Co.
  538 So. 2d 491· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-01-31 ·cited 30×
  Daniel and Hilda Cardenas sued Yellow Cab after Daniel's foot was run over by a taxi wheel during a disputed return to a condominium. The jury found Yellow Cab liable for false imprisonment, negligence, and breach of contract of carriage, awarding $645,000 in damages. On consolid
• Gutzwiller v. Fenik
  860 F.2d 1317· 6th Cir.· 1988-11-01 ·cited 30×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support claims of sex discrimination and substantive due process violations against the defendants, and that judicial intervention in academic tenure decisions is generally inappropriate.
• Honeywell, Inc. v. Am. Standards Testing Bureau, Inc.
  851 F.2d 652· 3d Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 30×
  The court held that expert testimony is sufficient to prove causation in a negligence action and that alleged deficiencies in defense counsel's representation do not constitute a superseding cause of the plaintiff's loss.
• Circle J Dairy, Inc. v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Prods., Inc.
  790 F.2d 694· 8th Cir.· 1986-05-12 ·cited 30×·via Comparative Fault
  The court held that while the refusal to instruct on comparative fault was error, the jury's damage instruction effectively served the same purpose, and sufficient evidence supported the awards for lost milk production and herd damage. Errors regarding the deceit claim were harml
• Brockton Sav. Bank v. Peat
  771 F.2d 5· 1st Cir.· 1985-08-26 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in entering a default judgment for discovery abuse and that the damages hearing was adequate, as contributory negligence is not a defense to intentional torts.
• Ins. Co. OF N. Am. & John Menninger v. Pasakarnis
  425 So. 2d 1141· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-12-15 ·cited 30×
• Nat'l CAR Rental Sys., Inc. v. Bostic
  423 So. 2d 915· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-10-26 ·cited 30×
  National Car Rental and its insurer appealed a $180,000 judgment to Marvin Bostic for injuries sustained in a head-on collision caused by a rental car driver, along with emotional distress from witnessing his mother's death at the scene. The appellate court affirmed the liability
• Mahoney v. Sears
  419 So. 2d 754· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-09-22 ·cited 30×
  Michael Mahoney, an 18-year-old part-time employee who lost 80% vision in one eye due to a workplace injury, challenged the constitutionality of Florida's workers' compensation law limiting his recovery to $1,200 for eye loss. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the statu
• Agrico Chem. Co. v. M/V BEN W. Martin (ex: M/V Greenville)
  664 F.2d 85· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-17 ·cited 30×·via Comparative Fault
  The court held that both Brent and Logicon were negligent and equally liable for the cargo loss, reversing the district court's finding of sole liability on Brent.
• Dorsey v. Honda Motor Co. Ltd.
  655 F.2d 650· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-11 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court erred in setting aside the jury's award of punitive damages against Honda and that the issue of Continental Casualty's liability for those damages requires further consideration under Florida law regarding insurance coverage for punitive dam
• Evans v. Transportacion Maritime Mexicana SS "Campeche"
  639 F.2d 848· 2d Cir.· 1981-01-05 ·cited 30×
  The court held that despite errors in the jury charge, the jury reached the proper result on the facts, and the errors did not affect the outcome.
• City OF Cleveland v. Peter Kiewit Sons' Co.
  624 F.2d 749· 6th Cir.· 1980-06-18 ·cited 30×
  The court held that pervasive misconduct by the City's counsel in repeatedly referring to the defendant's size and insurance coverage prejudiced the jury, requiring a new trial on all issues.
• Bachtel v. Mammoth Bulk Carriers, Ltd.
  605 F.2d 438· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-20 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of negligence against the shipowner and that the stevedore must contribute to the longshoreman's attorney fees on a pro-rata basis.
• Tabasky v. Dreyfuss
  350 So. 2d 520· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-10-04 ·cited 30×
  Jason Tabasky appeals a $7,000 jury verdict in his favor for personal injuries from an automobile accident, challenging the trial court's admission of an investigator's memorandum documenting a witness's statement. The appellate court affirmed, holding that Tabasky forfeited his
• Zelma Heath and Lawrence Heath v. First Baptist Church
  341 So. 2d 265· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-01-05 ·cited 30×
  The Heath plaintiffs appealed a summary judgment dismissing their negligence action against First Baptist Church for injuries sustained when Mrs. Heath fell over a step between different floor levels in the church. The court reversed, holding that genuine issues of material fact
• Melia v. Ford Motor Co.
  534 F.2d 795· 8th Cir.· 1976-04-20 ·cited 30×
  A manufacturer should not be held liable when its product's design meets industry standards and does not present an unreasonable risk of harm.
• In re the use by the trial courts of the Standard Jury Instructions (Civil Cases)
  290 So. 2d 49· Fla.· 1974-01-21 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court approved revisions to standard civil jury instructions, including modifications to reflect comparative negligence doctrine and deletion of obsolete charges.
• Horace v. ST. Louis Sw. R.R. Co.
  489 F.2d 632· 8th Cir.· 1974-01-02 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for relief from judgment, as the alleged error did not constitute plain error and Rule 60(b) cannot be used to extend the time for appeal.
• Petsonella Moragne v. State Marine Lines, Inc.
  211 So. 2d 161· Fla.· 1968-05-29 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question from the Fifth Circuit regarding whether Florida's Wrongful Death Statute creates a cause of action for unseaworthiness, a maritime tort. The court held that unseaworthiness is not covered by the statute because the statute
• Wyman C. Lowe v. Taylor Steel Prods. Co.
  373 F.2d 65· 8th Cir.· 1967-02-23 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the jury verdict, holding that the plaintiff failed to properly preserve his alleged errors on appeal due to insufficient objections and that the exclusion of expert testimony was not prejudicial.
• Cromling v. The Pittsburgh & Lake Erie R.R. Co.
  327 F.2d 142· 3d Cir.· 1963-11-13 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the erroneous admission of a physician's letter and the trial judge's prejudicial conduct towards counsel warranted a new trial.
• Seaboard AIR Line R.R. Co. v. George F. McCOURT Trucking, Inc.
  277 F.2d 593· 5th Cir.· 1960-04-20 ·cited 30×
  A consent judgment from a prior lawsuit, which was a compromise settlement and not actually litigated on the merits, does not operate as an estoppel by judgment in a subsequent suit involving different parties.
• Desalvo v. Curry
  160 Fla. 7· Fla.· 1948-01-09 ·cited 30×
  In this negligence action arising from a two-vehicle collision, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed a judgment for Mary Martha Curry against Grace DeSalvo, holding that despite the driver-husband's potential negligence in entering the intersection, the passenger-wife retained her
• Seaboard Air Line Railway v. Rentz
  60 Fla. 449· Fla.· 1910-06-01 ·cited 30×
  Seaboard Air Line Railway appealed a judgment of $8,500 plus interest awarded against it for negligently failing to feed, water, and promptly deliver seventeen mules shipped from Georgia to Florida, resulting in ten deaths and seven injuries. The Florida Supreme Court reversed th
• Mitchell v. United States
  2011 WL 2981818· M.D. Fla.· 2021-12-15 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the plaintiff's motion to strike the defendant's second, third, and sixth affirmative defenses should be denied.
• Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Hess
  95 So. 3d 254· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-05-02 ·cited 29×·via Comparative Fault
  Philip Morris USA appeals a judgment in favor of the estate of Stuart Hess, a deceased smoker, in an Engle progeny tobacco liability case. The court affirms the application of Engle findings on strict liability and negligence claims but reverses the fraudulent concealment claim a
• Theron D. Howard, Jr. v. Risch
  959 So. 2d 308· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-05-11 ·cited 29×
  Howard appealed the trial court's dismissal of his automobile negligence action as a sanction for alleged fraud in discovery responses. The appellate court reversed, finding that the minimal evidence presented—primarily documents without live testimony—did not support the trial c
• Republic Servs. OF Fla., L.P. v. Poucher
  851 So. 2d 866· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-08-12 ·cited 29×
  Republic Services appeals a trial court's order granting additur (increase) to a jury verdict in a negligence case involving a recycling bin striking a plaintiff. The appellate court reversed, holding that the jury's verdict was not inconsistent and that the trial court abused it
• U.S. Sec. Servs. Corp. v. Ramada INN, Inc.
  665 So. 2d 268· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-11-15 ·cited 29×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a trial court's judgment notwithstanding verdict (JNOV) that absolved Ramada Inn of vicarious liability for a security company's negligence in failing to protect a business invitee from a criminal attack. The court held that even though the secu
• Joanette R. Lindsey and Robert L. Lindsey v. Bill Arflin Bonding Agency Inc.
  645 So. 2d 565· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-11-18 ·cited 29×
  The court reversed a summary judgment dismissing a negligence claim against a building owner and bonding agency after the plaintiff slipped and fell on wet steps lacking handrails. The court held that whether the absence of handrails constituted a breach of the duty of ordinary c
• Dosdourian v. Carsten
  624 So. 2d 241· Fla.· 1993-08-26 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court banned Mary Carter agreements prospectively, holding that all future agreements requiring a settling defendant to remain in litigation are void as against public policy. The Court answered the certified question affirmatively, requiring disclosure of set
• Ralph Maercks, M.D. & Ralph Maercks, M.D., P.A. v. Birchansky
  549 So. 2d 199· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-06-27 ·cited 29×
  Dr. Ralph Maercks appeals a $750,000 jury verdict in a medical malpractice case, arguing that improper closing argument by plaintiff's counsel deprived him of a fair trial. The court agrees and reverses, finding that plaintiff's counsel made impermissible arguments asking the jur
• Doucet v. Gulf OIL Corp.
  783 F.2d 518· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-20 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the borrowed-employee doctrine remains a defense under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, but reversed the judgment due to an erroneous jury instruction that suggested the oil company would pay compensation if the worker was a borrowed em
• Woods v. Withrow
  413 So. 2d 1179· Fla.· 1982-04-29 ·cited 29×
  Yes in part. Justice Harry A. Blackmun delivered the majority opinion, reversing in part and remanding. The Court followed the three-trimester framework laid out in Roe v. Wade. The Supreme Court held that provisions 1, 2 and 8 were constitutional. Provisions 3 and 4 were unconst
• Tommie v. LaCHANCE
  412 So. 2d 439· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-04-14 ·cited 29×
  The court addressed whether two separate wrongful death and injury actions arising from the same motor vehicle-dirt bike collision should be consolidated. The defendant sought consolidation to prevent potentially contradictory verdicts regarding which boy operated the dirt bike,
• Gaynell Reyno v. Piper Aircraft Co.
  630 F.2d 149· 3d Cir.· 1980-07-24 ·cited 29×
  A party moving for transfer under § 1404(a) is not automatically estopped from later asserting forum non conveniens, but the prior transfer motion must be weighed against dismissal. The district court erred in dismissing the action based on insufficient showing of witness inconve
• Rudelson v. United States
  602 F.2d 1326· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-23 ·cited 29×
  The court held that federal air traffic controllers owed a duty of care to monitor and warn pilots in a dangerous traffic pattern, and that the United States, as their employer, is subject to California's joint and several liability rules under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
• Getty OIL Co. (Eastern Operations), Inc. v. SS Ponce de Leon
  555 F.2d 328· 2d Cir.· 1977-05-16 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the allocation of fault in a maritime collision case is a question of fact subject to the "clearly erroneous" standard of review on appeal, and affirmed the district court's apportionment of fault.
• Scoville v. Mo. Pac. R.R. Co.
  458 F.2d 639· 8th Cir.· 1972-04-12 ·cited 29×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to submit the issues of the railroad's negligence (failure to warn and maintaining an extrahazardous crossing) and proximate cause to the jury, and that the jury's verdicts were not excessive.
• Milby v. Pace Pontiac, Inc.
  176 So. 2d 554· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-06-11 ·cited 29×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's dismissal of a negligence complaint brought by Lydia and Howard Milby against Pace Pontiac, Inc., arising from Lydia's slip-and-fall injury at the entrance to the defendant's building. The court held that the trial jud
• United States v. Jumelia M. DeVANE
  306 F.2d 182· 5th Cir.· 1962-08-15 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the government's negligence in cancelling a search and rescue operation, which worsened the decedent's position, could lead to liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act, but remanded for specific findings on the worsening of position and potential contributo
• Martin v. Rivers
  72 So. 2d 789· Fla.· 1954-05-21 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a jury verdict awarding $10,000 to a widow for her husband's death caused by a train operated by the railroad, holding that the deceased's negligence in failing to look or listen before crossing railroad tracks was the sole proximate cause and e
• R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Marotta
  214 So. 3d 590· Fla.· 2017-04-06 ·cited 28×·via Comparative Fault
  The Florida Supreme Court held that federal law does not implicitly preempt state law strict liability and negligence claims brought by Engle progeny plaintiffs against tobacco manufacturers. The court rejected the argument that imposing tort liability for cigarette sales amounts
• R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Hiott
  129 So. 3d 473· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-01-03 ·cited 28×·via Comparative Fault
  R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company appeals a jury verdict awarding damages to the estate of Kenneth Hiott for smoking-related death, raising challenges to the admission of evidence regarding Reynolds' federal litigation against tobacco warnings, the denial of a statute of repose jury
• Ellis Singletary v. Mary Kendra Lewis, M.D.
  584 So. 2d 634· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-08-12 ·cited 28×
  In this medical malpractice appeal, the court reversed a jury verdict in favor of Dr. Lewis and remanded for juror interviews after evidence emerged that a juror may have concealed knowledge of the plaintiff's family during voir dire and that improper remarks suggesting bias may
• Waldorf v. Shuta
  896 F.2d 723· 3d Cir.· 1990-02-07 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding the burden of proof for dangerous condition liability were erroneous and required a new trial. The court also found that the Borough's failure to provide emergency signaling devices was not necessarily inconsistent with the find
• Lochrane Eng'g, Inc. v. Willingham Realgrowth Inv. Fund, Ltd.
  552 So. 2d 228· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-10-12 ·cited 28×·via Comparative Fault
  This case addresses the proper measure of damages for breach of implied warranty in the sale of new residential units with an inadequate septic tank system, and the liability of a design engineer for negligent design. The court held that damages should be limited to repair costs
• Trevino v. Gen. Dynamics Corp.
  865 F.2d 1474· 5th Cir.· 1989-02-23 ·cited 28×
  The court held that 'approval' under the government contractor defense requires more than a mere rubber stamp; it must involve the government exercising or delegating discretion over the product design, grounded in policy judgment.