JACKSONVILLE TRACTION COMPANY, A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
PEARL SEELBACH, BY MATILDA SEELBACH, HER NEXT FRIEND, DEFENDANT IN ERROR

Fla. | 1932-07-05
Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur., Buford, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
106 Fla. 72 Florida Supreme Court (1932) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 141 So. 892
Cited by 3 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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a judgment for a passenger injured on a streetcar. The court found the damages awarded were excessive for the minor injuries sustained and offered the plaintiff the option to accept a reduced judgment or face a new trial.


Holding

The court held that the damages awarded were excessive for the minor injuries sustained. While there was some evidence of negligence and damages, the award was disproportionate to the harm.


Key Quotes

“There was some evidence to support negligence and damages but on the whole showing made the personal injuries received were of minor character for which the damages awarded were excessive.”

This quote explains the court's reasoning for finding the damages excessive.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

A passenger on a streetcar operated by the Jacksonville Traction Company was injured when the streetcar collided with another, causing the passenger t…

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
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

Defendant in error was a passenger on a street ear of plaintiff in error. The car on which defendant in error was riding collided with a second car and threw defendant in error to the floor as a result of which she was bruised and received other minor injuries. As plaintiff *73below ¿he brought this action and secured a judgment in the sum oí $2,000. To' that judgment defendant took writ of error.

It is contended here that plaintiff did not sustain the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the street ears were negligently operated, that the damages awarded were excessive, and that the trial court committed error in refusing to strike the testimony of certain expert witnesses'.

We have examined the record and do not think the • evidence which plaintiff sought to' strike was harmful. There was some evidence to support negligence and damages but on the whole showing made the personal injuries received were of minor character for which the damages awarded were excessive. If the plaintiff will enter a remittitur in the sum of $1,500.00 the judgment will be permitted to stand for the balance, otherwise the cause is reversed for a new trial.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.

Buford, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur in the opinion and judgment.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Jacksonville Traction Co. v. Seelbach, 117 Fla. 233 (Fla. 1934)
    …Per Curiam. This is the second appearance of this case in this Court. See 106 Fla. 72, 141 Sou. 892. The case [*234] was affirmed on its former appearance here upon condition of remittitur. It is contended that the condition of affirmance was equivalent to a holding by this Court that the plaintiff could not recover more than $500.0…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw