CONSOLIDATED GROCERY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
J. A. ALLMAN, 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 $2,500 judgment for personal injuries, finding the damages award excessive where the plaintiff suffered bruises, pain, and inconvenience from being struck by a protruding wagon pole on a streetcar, absent evidence of permanent injuries or punitive damages warranting such recovery.
The judgment is reversed because the $2,500 damages award is excessive. Where injuries and suffering are not very great and punitive damages are not warranted by the facts, an award of apparently excessive damages may cause reversal, particularly when compensation rather than punishment is the proper object.
“Ordinarily a verdict awarding damages for personal injuries will not be disturbed for mere excessiveness unless the amount shocks the judicial conscience or indicates that the jury were not governed by the evidence in fixing the amount awarded”
Establishes the standard for reviewing allegedly excessive damages awards
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAllman was riding in a street car when he was struck by a pole protruding from the Consolidated Grocery Company's wagon, causing him personal injuries…
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 Excessive Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, C. J.
This writ of error was taken to a judgment for $2500.00, damages recovered by Allman against the Consolidated Grocery Company for personal injuries received by the alleged negligent stinking of All- man by the pole of the defendant’s wagon protruding into a street car where Allman was riding.
A discussion of the several errors assigned will apparently serve no useful purpose. One of the grounds of the motion for new trial is that the verdict is excessive, and the denial of the motion for new trial is assigned as error, the excessiveness of the verdict being insisted on.
Ordinarily a verdict awarding damages for personal injuries will not be disturbed for mere excessiveness unless the amount shocks the judicial conscience or indicates that the jury were not governed by the evidence in fixing the amount awarded, and this is specially so when the injuries are of a permanent nature and caused great suffering, expense and loss. See Atlantic Coast Line Ry. Co. v. Beazley, 54 Fla. 311, text 424, 45 South. Rep. 761. But where the injuries and suffering and expense and loss appear to be not very great, and punitive damages are not called for by the facts of the case, the awarding of damages apparently excessive may cause a reversal. Here compensation is the object and the bruises, pain, inconvenience, loss and expense and the circumstances and character of the injury shown in this case do not warrant a recovery of $2500.00, damages. The Liability here is not as clearly established as in the cases of Florida Ry. & Nav. Co. v. Webester, 25 Fla. 391, 5 South. Rep. 711, and Florida Cent. & P. R. Co. v. Foxworth, 45 Fla. 278, 34 South. Rep. 270, Avhere remittiturs were permitted.
The Judgment is reversed.
All concur, except Taylor, J., absent on account of illness.
Petition for rehearing in this case denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jernigan v. Thompson, 103 Fla. 784 (Fla. 1931)…think the court should have answered the question in the affirmative. See Florida Ry. & Nav. Co. v. Webster, 25 Fla. 394, 5 South. Rep. 714; Florida Cent. & P. R. Co. v. Foxworth, 45 Fla. 278, 34 South. Rep. 270; Consolidated Grocery Co. v. Allman, 59 Fla. 230, 51 South. Rep. 928. The judgment is reversed unless the defendant in error shall within ten days enter a remittitur of eight hundred dollars, in which case the judgment shall stand affirmed. [*786] Buford, O.J., and Whitfield and Terrell, J.J., co…
-
St. Petersburg & Gulf Ry. Co. v. Van Smith, 71 Fla. 64 (Fla. 1916)…he judgment will be reversed when the liability of the defendant is not clearly established and the amount awarded is apparently in excess of just compensation for the injury and loss shown to have been sustained. Consolidated Grocery Co. v. Allman, 59 Fla. 230, 51 South. Rep. 928; Jacksonville Electric Co. v. Dillon, 67 Fla. 114, 64 South. Rep. 669. The judgment is reversed and a new trial awarded. All concur, except Cockrell, J., absent by reason of sickness.…
Authorities Cited
- Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Beazley, 54 Fla. 311 (Fla. 1907)
- Fla. Cent. & Peninsular R.R. Co. v. Foxworth, 45 Fla. 278 (Fla. 1903)