J. B. COLT COMPANY, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
H. P. GAINEY, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court reversed a directed verdict, holding that the question of whether a prima facie showing of consideration was overcome by the defendant's evidence was a jury question.
Yes, it was error for the court to instruct a verdict. The court held that whether the prima facie showing of consideration was overcome by the defendant's evidence, or was sufficient without failure, was a jury question.
“Whether this prima facie showing of consideration was overcome by the evidence offered by the defendant or was sufficient to establish consideration without failure thereof was a jury question and it was error for the court to instruct a verdict.”
This quote explains the core legal principle that the issue of whether consideration failed was a jury question, making the directed verdict erroneous.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff, J. B. Colt Company, sued H. P. Gainey on promissory notes. The defendant pleaded failure of consideration. The trial court directed a v…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jury Question cases and more on FLexlaw
— In this case there were pleas of failure of consideration. "Verdict was directed in favor of the defendant on the theory that plaintiff did not meet the burden of proof as is required. Davis v. Leighton, 80 Fla. 594, 86 South. Rep. 564.
Assuming that the burden of proof to meet the plea of failure of consideration was on the plaintiff, there was some evidence to prove valuable consideration for the execution and delivery of the notes constituting the cause of action. This evidence consisted of the notes and proof of delivery and installation of the property for which the notes were given with the written statement by the defendant that the delivery and installation was satisfactory. "Whether this prima facie showing of consideration was overcome by the evidence offered by the defendant or was sufficient to establish consideration without failure thereof was a jury question and it was error for the court to instruct a verdict.
The judgment is reversed.
Reversed.
Whitfiedd, Ellis, Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.
Brown, J., concurs specially.
(Concurring specially) : Wliile concurring in the conclusion and judgment of reversal, I am inclined to the view that the burden of proof was on the defendant under its pleas in this ease. See sections 6784, 6788 C. G. L.
Brown, J.,
(Concurring specially) : Wliile concurring in the conclusion and judgment of reversal, I am inclined to the view that the burden of proof was on the defendant under its pleas in this ease. See sections 6784, 6788 C. G. L.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Coquina Ridge Props. v. E. W. Co., 255 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)…Kelly, Fla.App.1960, 125 So. 2d 109. Whether the evidence offered by the defendant was sufficient to establish the want or failure of consideration was a question of fact to be tried and resolved by the trier of fact. J. B. Colt Co. v. Gainey, 1931, 102 Fla. 1065, 136 So. 698; cf. Wagner v. Bonucelli, Fla.App.1970, 239 So. 2d 619. Although we reverse on the basis of the application of the aforementioned principles relating to summary judgment we note in passing that the defendant’s contention regarding the…
-
Towles v. Azar, 112 Fla. 405 (Fla. 1933)…e of a plea [*406] of failure of consideration of the promissory note, the burden of proof was on the defendant or the plaintiff under the plea. That question was discussed, but not necessarily involved in the decision in the case of Colt v. Gainey, 102 Fla. 1065, 136 Sou. Rep. 698. Our view is that, in a suit on a promissory note, while consideration for the note is' presumed (Section 6784 C. G. L., 4698, R. G. S.), yet in cases where the defendant properly pleads failure of consideration, as an excuse for…
Authorities Cited
- Davis v. Leighton, 80 Fla. 594 (Fla. 1920)