JORGE SOLANO, APPELLANT,

v.

CARNIVAL CRUISE LINES, INC., AND FESTIVAL MARITIME, INC., APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 1986-07-15

No. 85-1563

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARK-DULL and JORGENSON, JJ.

491 So. 2d 325 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1986) Caution

Cited by 6 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 trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendants because the plaintiff's lay testimony was sufficient to establish a prima facie case without expert testimony.

Facts & Procedural History

The plaintiff, a painter, testified that noxious fumes from oil-base paint caused him to become dizzy, leading to a slip and fall. The trial court dir…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Topics

Lay Testimony Jones Act Unseaworthiness Proximate Cause

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Lay Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

The appellees’ motion for clarification is granted. The opinion of this court filed on May 13,1986, is hereby withdrawn, and the following opinion is adopted in its stead.

We agree with the appellant, plaintiff below, that the trial court erred in directing a verdict in favor of the appellees, defendants below, on the basis that in the absence of expert testimony there was no evidence to go to the jury which would establish that any acts or omissions by the appellees proximately caused the appellant’s injuries. Contrary to appellees’ assertion, appellant was competent to testify as a lay witness regarding the effect that noxious fumes which emanated from an oil-base paint had upon his body while painting a ship’s generator room without ventilation (the doors were closed at the direction of a superior officer so that the odors would not bother passengers).

Solano testified, without contradiction, that the fumes from the paint caused him to become dizzy, resulting in his subsequent slip and fall. No expert testimony was required to establish a pri-ma facie case in this Jones Act/unseaworthiness proceeding. See Curry v. Fluor Drilling Services, Inc., 715 F. 2d 893 (5th Cir.1983).

Given the “featherweight” burden of proof necessary to establish Jones Act negligence and/or the exceptionally light burden of proof necessary to establish proximate cause in unseaworthiness cases, it was error for the trial court to have directed a verdict. See Robin v. Wilson Brothers Drilling, 719 F. 2d 96 (5th Cir.1983); Thezan v. Maritime Overseas Corp., 708 F. 2d 175, 180 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1050, 104 S.Ct. 729, 79 L.Ed.2d 189 (1984); Johannessen v. Gulf Trading & Transportation Co., 633 F. 2d 653 (2d Cir.1980); see also Chisholm v. Sabine Towing & Transportation Co., 679 F. 2d 60 (5th Cir.1982).

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

Mateus Da Cunha dos Santos v. Ajax Navigation Corp., 531 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)

…art of the employer coupled by direct or circumstantial evidence to the injury sustained by the employee creates a jury question. Trochez v. Holland-American Cruise Lines, 353 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). In Solano v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 491 So. 2d 325, 325-26 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), we reversed a directed verdict and held that the injured seaman had presented a prima facie case under the Jones Act and for unseaworthiness: We agree with the appellant, plaintiff below, that the trial court erred in di…
Favio Waggon-Dixon v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., 679 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)

…on v. Bryant, 671 F. 2d 1276, 1279 (11th Cir.1982)(“The question of unseaworthiness is ordinarily one for the jury and only in a rare ease can a vessel be unseawor-thy as a matter of law.”) (citations omitted); Solano v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 491 So. 2d 325 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). In the instant case, Waggon-Dixon based his claim of unseaworthiness on two grounds. The appellant alleged that the condition of the ship itself was defective and, furthermore, that RCCL did not properly train its cabin stewards…
Lane v. Tripp, 788 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)

…ock Marine, Inc., 107 F. 3d 331, 339 (5th Cir.1997) for the proposition that the standard of care under the Jones Act is no longer “slightest causation,” but ordinary prudence, and that this court’s decision in Solano v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 491 So. 2d 325 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) is in conflict. We disagree. The defendant misreads Gautreaux, which concerned the duty of care owed and comparative negligence, not the plaintiffs evidentiary burden to overcome a motion for summary judgment. The court in Gautrea…

Authorities Cited

Eugene v. Thezan, 708 F.2d 175 (5th Cir. 1983)
Lampkins v. Gagnon, 464 U.S. 1050 (U.S. 1984)
Conger v. Louisiana, 464 U.S. 1050 (U.S. 1984)
Helena Johannessen v. Gulf Trading & Transp. Co. & Blackships, Inc., 633 F.2d 653 (2d Cir. 1980)
Chisholm v. Sabine Towing & Transp. Co., Inc., 679 F.2d 60 (5th Cir. 1982)
Robin v. Wilson Bros. Drilling, 719 F.2d 96 (5th Cir. 1983)
Curry v. Fluor Drilling Servs., Inc., 715 F.2d 893 (5th Cir. 1983)

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw