STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY AND JOHN E. WILKERSON, APPELLANTS,
v.
FANNIE HOWARD, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1984-11-14
No. 84-309
DANAHY and LEHAN, JJ., concur.
458 So. 2d 874 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1984) Caution
Cited by 10 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court did not err in granting a directed verdict on the tort exemption and did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial on damages.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellants appealed an order granting a new trial on damages and a directed verdict on their third affirmative defense. The trial court ruled that 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.


Opinion of the Court
RYDER, Chief Judge.

RYDER, Chief Judge.

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and John E. Wilkerson, de fendants below, appeal from an order granting a new trial on the issue of damages and a directed verdict as to their third affirmative defense. The trial court granted appellee’s motion for a directed verdict, ruling that the tort exemption of section 627.733, Florida Statutes (1981), did not apply in this automobile accident case.

We find no error in the directed verdict. Appellants failed to carry their burden of showing that the trial court erred in its ruling and that they were entitled to the statutory tort exemption.

Appellants also failed to carry their heavy burden of showing that the trial judge abused his discretion in granting a new trial. Baptist Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Bell, 384 So. 2d 145 (Fla.1980); Castlewood International Corp. v. Lafleur, 322 So. 2d 520 (Fla.1975). Although appel-lee presented evidence of an objectively verifiable injury, the jury awarded her zero damages. Her medical expenses were undisputed. Clearly, she is entitled to a new trial. Griffis v. Hill, 230 So. 2d 143 (Fla. 1969); Hannabass v. Florida Home Insurance Co., 412 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); Albritton v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 382 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). Therefore, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.

DANAHY and LEHAN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Cowen v. Thornton, 621 So. 2d 684 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
    …ailure to grant a new trial was error. The proper method to challenge an inadequate verdict is to file a motion for new trial. See, e.g., McCloud v. Sherman Mobile Concrete Co., 579 So. 2d 773 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); State Farm Mut. Ins. Co. v. Howard, 458 So. 2d 874 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Generally a plaintiff cannot be awarded zero damages when he has suffered some damages from the negligence of the defendant. McCloud; Howard. When a damage award is clearly inadequate and the issue of liability was contested, it…
  • Massey v. Netschke, 504 So. 2d 1376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
    …agree and reverse. Griffis v. Hill, 230 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1969); Taylor v. Ganas, 443 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Shelly v. Hartford Casualty Insurance Co., 445 So. 2d 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Howard, 458 So. 2d 874 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Defendants argue that a new trial should not be granted since plaintiffs did not object or request resubmission of the case to the jury after the verdicts were rendered. Defendants have confused an inconsistent verdict with an i…
  • Hartsfield v. Orlando Reg'l Med. Ctr., Inc., 522 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)
    …om the negligence of the defendant, the jury cannot reasonably return a verdict for zero damages, and the appellant is entitled to a new trial. Short v. Ehrler, 510 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company v. Howard, 458 So. 2d 874 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Hannabass v. Florida Home Insurance Company, 412 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). See also Hagens v. Hilston, 388 So. 2d 1379 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Albritton v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 382 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 2d…

Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw