SELMA R. JOSEPHSON, APPELLANT,
v.
RONALD BOWERS, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
The appellant claims error in the trial court’s refusal to order a new trial after the jury returned a verdict finding no permanent injury, but awarding appellee damages for past and future loss of income. We agree with appellant that the verdict is inconsistent with the legal requirement in Florida that there be permanent injury before a defendant may be held liable for future loss of income and other future damages in a personal injury claim. Hubbs v. McDonald, 517 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Our conclusion on this issue moots the other claims on appeal.
Since there is no assertion of error in the jury’s finding of negligence, we reverse and remand for a new trial on the issues of the permanency of any injuries sustained and on damages.
ANSTEAD, LETTS and DELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Tompkins, 651 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 1995)…District Court held that the trial court erroneously instructed the jury that the respondent Tompkins must have suffered a “permanent injury” to recover future economic damages. We have jurisdiction based on direct conflict with Josephson v. Bowers, 595 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed, we approve the decision of the district court. We find that, in order to recover future economic damages, a claimant must establish only that the future economic damages…1 / 2
-
Fazzolari v. The City OF W. Palm Beach, 608 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…him for past damages, it was held to be error not to award future damages. See Watson v. Builders Square, Inc., 563 So. 2d 721 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). However, there must have been a determination that there was a permanent injury. Josephson v. Bowers, 595 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Unlike the case of Hubbs v. McDonald, 517 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), the trial court here did instruct the jury on awarding future damages if they found a permanent injury. Apparently, the jury did not find such an injury in…
-
Standard Jury Instructions-Civil Cases (1.0, 613 So. 2d 1316 (Fla. 1993)…, review denied, 492 So. 2d 1333 (Fla.1986); McClellan v. Industrial Fire & Casualty Ins. Co., 475 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Bennett v. Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Ins. Co., 477 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); see contra Josephson v. Bowers, 595 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). Therefore, negligence will still be an issue for the jury to decide where there are recoverable economic damages even in cases where no permanency is found. If, however, there are no recoverable damages or such damages are not s…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hubbs v. McDONALD, 517 So. 2d 68 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)