LEANDER J. SHAW, JR. AND DOLORES P. SHAW, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
OSCAR PETERSON, III, ALGERIE LOUISE PETERSON, AND FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION, INC., AS SUCCESSOR TO MANCHESTER INSURANCE AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, NOW INSOLVENT, APPELLEES
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.
In this automobile accident damages appeal, the Florida First District Court of Appeal affirmed the jury's $2,500 award to the injured husband but reversed the $0 damages award to his wife for loss of consortium, finding she was entitled to at least nominal damages based on undisputed evidence.
The court held that the exclusion of mortality tables was not reversible error due to lack of proper preservation, insufficient evidence of permanent injury, and harmlessness; however, the zero damages award for Mrs. Shaw's loss of consortium was improper because undisputed evidence of her loss of consortium entitled her to at least nominal damages.
[1] A jury's award of zero damages for loss of consortium cannot stand when there is undisputed evidence of such loss.
[2] A party must properly preserve an evidentiary ruling for appeal by seeking to introduce the evidence and having the request denied.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Since the record contains undisputed evidence of her loss of consortium as a result of Mr. Shaw's injuries, she was entitled to receive at least nominal damages.”
Establishes the legal principle that undisputed evidence of loss of consortium entitles a spouse to at least nominal damages as a matter of law.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1974, Algerie Peterson's car collided with Leander Shaw's car. Mrs. Peterson admitted liability. The case proceeded to trial solely on damages. The…
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 Mortality Tables cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
By this appeal, appellants challenge the jury’s verdict insofar as it awarded zero' damages to Mrs. Shaw on her claim for loss of consortium. They also contend that the trial court committed reversible error in refusing to allow them to introduce mortality tables into evidence.
This case arose from a 1974 automobile accident in which a car driven by Algerie Peterson collided with a car driven by appellant, Leander Shaw. Mrs. Peterson admitted liability, and the case went to trial solely on the issue of damages. The jury awarded Mr. Shaw $2,500 but gave Mrs. Shaw nothing for loss of consortium. The court entered final judgment on the verdict, and this timely appeal followed.
We reject appellants’ arguments concerning the mortality tables for three reasons. First, appellants have not properly preserved the point for appeal. While the record reflects that the court denied appellants’ request for an instruction advising the jury of the weight to be given mortality tables [Fla.Std.Jury Instr. (Civ.) 6.9], the record does not indicate that appellants ever sought to introduce any mortality tables into evidence.
Our second reason for rejecting appellants’ argument is that there was an insufficient showing that Mr. Shaw suffered permanent injuries as a result of the accident. Finally, even if there was evidence of permanency, the failure to permit the introduction of mortality tables was, in this case, harmless error. The court properly instructed the jury on the elements of future damages which Mr. Shaw could recover, and Mr. Shaw’s counsel didn’t even refer to future damages in his closing argument. See Sundermeier v. Frauman, 214 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968).
We agree with appellants, however, that the jury’s verdict of zero damages for Mrs. Shaw cannot stand. Since the record contains undisputed evidence of her loss of consortium as a result of Mr. Shaw’s injuries, she was entitled to receive at least nominal damages. Webber v. Jordan, 366 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978).
Accordingly, we reversé that part of the jury verdict which deals with Mrs. Shaw’s claim and remand the case for a new trial on that issue. Otherwise, we affirm.
GRIMES, Acting Chief Associate Judge, and SCHEB and DANAHY, Associate Judges, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Albritton v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. & Cheryl Lee Dannels, 382 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…d spent one week in Texas with her husband since his move. In view of the testimony offered by Mrs. Albritton and unrebutted by appellees, we are of the opinion that Mrs. Albritton was entitled to receive at least nominal damages. Shaw v. Peterson, 376 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Webber v. Jordan, 366 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). For this reason, we reverse the zero dollar award to Mrs. Albritton and remand this cause for a new trial solely on the issue of damages as they pertain to her action for loss…
-
Hagens v. Hilston, 388 So. 2d 1379 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…puted evidence of loss of consortium exists, a zero verdict is inconsistent with an award for the injured spouse. Albritton v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 382 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Webber v. Jordan, supra; Shaw v. Peterson, 376 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Kinne v. Burgin, 311 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). In the case at bar, while there is some evidence of the wife’s loss of consortium, the evidence is insubstantial and rebutted. At trial the wife testified that after the accid…
-
Nadia Bach and Ronald Carter v. Murray, 658 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…3d DCA 1971). This result is equally applicable to Carter’s claim for loss of consortium. Loftin v. Anderson, 66 So. 2d 470 (Fla.1953); McCloud, 579 So. 2d at 774; Klosters Rederi A/S v. Cowden, 447 So. 2d 1017 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Shaw v. Peterson, 376 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Webber v. Jordan, 366 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 374 So. 2d 102 (Fla.1979); Kinne v. Burgin, 311 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Based upon the undisputed evidence of Bach’s fractured nose and toes, plus her abrasion…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Webber v. Jordan, 366 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- State v. ERP, 366 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- Sundermeier v. Frauman, 214 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)