ORANGE BELT AUTO LINE, A CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
FREDERICK A. HARFORD, 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 affirmed a lower court's judgment on the condition that the plaintiff enter a remittitur of $5,000.00; otherwise, the judgment would be reversed.
The damages awarded were excessive. The judgment is affirmed if a remittitur of $5,000.00 is entered; otherwise, the judgment is reversed.
“it seems to the Court [*547] that excessive damages are awarded in the said judgment”
The court's finding regarding the damages.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved a judgment from the Circuit Court that was appealed to the Florida Supreme Court. The appellate court reviewed the record, briefs, a…
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
Per Curiam.
This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that excessive damages are awarded in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed, provided a remittitur of $5,000.00 is entered within thirty days; otherwise, the judgment is reversed. Tampa Elec. Co. v. Gaffga, 81 Fla. 268, 87 South. Rep. 922; 83 Fla. 708.
It is so ordered.
Ellis, C. J., and Whitfield, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Tampa Elec. Co. v. Consuela Gaffga, 81 Fla. 268 (Fla. 1921)
- Lunham v. Lottie DeMerritt, 83 Fla. 708 (Fla. 1922)