THE SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILWAY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
E. C. BEUCHLER, 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 reviewed a judgment awarded to a plaintiff, finding the awarded amount not supported by the pleadings. The court offered the plaintiff a choice: either accept a reduced judgment or face a full reversal.
The court held that the awarded amount was not warranted by the pleadings. It offered the plaintiff the option to remit the disputed interest and attorney fee to affirm a reduced judgment, otherwise, the judgment would be reversed.
“it seems to the Court that the amount awarded to the plaintiff in the judgment is not warranted by the pleadings under the law”
This quote establishes the court's primary finding regarding the judgment's validity.
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, Seaboard Air Line Railway Company, was awarded a judgment that included an item for "interest @50% per annum $761.12" and an attorney f…
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 Interest Calculation cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
This cause having been heretofore submitted to the Court upon a transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and oral argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been inspected and considered, it seems to the Court that the amount awarded to the plaintiff in the judgment is not warranted by the pleadings under the law; it iá, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that if the plaintiff below shall, within thirty days from the filing of the mandate in the Circuit Court, enter a remittitur of the item of “interest @50% per annum $761.12,” and of the attorney fee awarded, the Court will render a judgment for $296.04 and $21.84 with 8% interest from the bringing of the action; otherwise the judgment will stand reversed.
Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.