UPTON
v.
HUTCHISON
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 affirmed a jury's verdict and judgment in an assault and battery case, holding that the jury's findings and damages awarded were supported by substantial evidence and not indicative of improper motive.
No, the appellate court should not disturb a jury's verdict and damage award if there is ample substantial evidence to support it and the award is not so excessive as to indicate improper motive.
“It is well settled that the verdict of a jury will not be disturbed by this court on appeal where there is ample substantial evidence to support such verdict.”
Establishes the standard of review for jury verdicts.
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 sued the defendant for assault and battery. A jury found for the plaintiff and awarded $2,500.00 in damages. The defendant appealed this…
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 Assault And Battery cases and more on FLexlaw
*21 ROBERTS, Justice.
The judgment here appealed from was entered by the court below in a civil action for assault and battery brought by plaintiff-appellee against defendant-appellant, wherein the jury found for the plaintiff and awarded damages in the amount of $2,500.00.
It is well settled that the verdict of a jury will not be disturbed by this court on appeal where there is ample substantial evidence to support such verdict. Nor will this court substitute its judgment for that of the jury as to the amount of damages to which the plaintiff is entitled, unless the amount found is so excessive as to indicate that the jury was influenced by passion, prejudice, corruption, or other improper motive. Loftin v. Dagley, 152 Fla. 831, 13 So. 2d 311; Florida Motor Lines Corp. v. Shontz, 159 Fla. 518, 32 So. 2d 248.
No error having been made to appear, the judgment of the lower court should be and it is hereby Affirmed.
ADAMS, C.J., and TERRELL and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Dorthy Bould and Edward Simonson, Jr. v. Touchette, 349 So. 2d 1181 (Fla. 1977)…*’ “The determination of the amount of such damages is peculiarly within the province of the jury. Higbee v. Dorigo, Fla.1953, 66 So. 2d 684; Merwin v. Rellenas, Fla.1955, 78 So. 2d 865; Sproule v. Nelson, supra. “In Upton v. Hutchison, Fla.1950, 46 So. 2d 20, 21, the Supreme Court said: ‘It is well settled that the verdict of a jury will not be disturbed by this court on appeal where there is ample substantial evidence to support such verdict. Nor will this court substitute its judgment for that of the…
-
Lalow v. Codomo, 101 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 1958)…the contract was made. The finders of fact determined that the parties intended a commission of 7Y¿% of the entire purchase price. There was testimony upon which this finding could be made. We will not disturb it here. Upton v. Hutchison, Fla.1950, 46 So. 2d 20; Glass v. Parrish, Fla.1951, 51 So. 2d 717, 721; Handel v. Rudnick, Fla.1955, 78 So. 2d 709. Appellants contend that the last sentence of the agreement conclusively determines that the amount of the commission must be determined by a percentage of…
-
Gresham v. Courson, 177 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)…ry. Unless ‘clearly arbitrary’, Sproule v. Nelson, Fla. 1955, 81 So. 2d 478, [76 A.L.R.2d 1066,] or ‘so excessive as to indicate that the jury was influenced by passion, prejudice, corruption, or other improper motive,’ Upton v. Hutchison, Fla.1950, 46 So. 2d 20, 21, or ‘so much greater than it should have been so as to shock the judicial conscience,’ Bartholf v. Baker, Fla. 1954, 71 So. 2d 480, 484, [*42] the amount awarded by the jury will not be disturbed on appeal. The burden is on the appellant to esta…
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence