FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
JAMES Z. WRIGHT, 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 reversed a personal injury judgment, finding insufficient evidence of negligence or proximate causation for the plaintiff's alleged injury.
No, the evidence was insufficient to establish either negligence by the defendant or that the plaintiff's injury was proximately caused by any act of the defendant.
“the evidence is insufficient when taken and considered as a whole, either to establish the existence of negligence on the part of the defendant, or to establish the fact that the plaintiff’s injury, if any, was directly or proximately caused by any act of the defendant.”
This quote explains the primary reason for the court's reversal.
The plaintiff, a passenger in a sidetracked train car, sued the railroad company for personal injury. The plaintiff alleged the injury occurred becaus…
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 Personal Injury cases and more on FLexlaw
Buford, J.
This was an action brought for personal injury alleged to have been inflicted upon the plaintiff by the defendant having carelessly and negligently sidetracked a car in which plaintiff was a passenger from Miami, Florida, to Valdosta, Georgia, in the railroad yard at Jacksonville, Florida. The declaration alleges that the injury occurred by reason of the facts that the plaintiff was sick and ailing and that the defendant sidetracked the car in the yards at Jacksonville and carelessly and negligently failed and neglected to heat and properly ventilate said car in which plaintiff was a passenger while said car was side-tracked as aforesaid and that the car became and was cold and draughty.
A verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiff and, after a remittitur had been entered, judgment was had, to which judgment writ of error was taken. The assignments of error present several questions of law which are not necessary to be discussed in this opinion because the evidence is insufficient when taken and considered as a whole, either to establish the existence of negligence on the part of the defendant, or to establish the fact that the plaintiff’s injury, if any, was directly or proximately caused by any act of the defendant. Therefore, the judgment should be reversed and it is so ordered.
Eeversed.
Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell, J., concur. Ellis, C. J. and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Garrett v. Am. Fruit Growers, 135 Fla. 398 (Fla. 1938)…83 So. 295; Varga v. Marcus Conant Co., 81 Fla. 780, 89 So. 126. A judgment against defendant should be reversed where the evidence is insufficient to establish a material fact necessary to create liability. Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Wright, 96 Fla. 656, 118 So. 916. A new trial, should be granted where the verdict is against the clear weight of the evidence or manifestly contrary to the evi [*417] deuce. Howell v. Blackburn, 100 Fla. 114, 129 So. 341. See also Florida Telephone Corp. v. Wallace, 1…