SCHMIDT
v.
ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. R. CO., ET. AL.
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.
In this wrongful death action arising from a railroad accident, the trial court denied the defendant railroad's motion for summary judgment and granted the plaintiff's motion to suppress evidence of her remarriage, ruling that evidence of remarriage or the possibility of remarriage is inadmissible on the issue of damages in a wrongful death case.
The court held that evidence of remarriage or the possibility of remarriage is inadmissible in a wrongful death action. Evidence of the plaintiff's remarriage will be suppressed, the plaintiff will be referred to by her former married name throughout trial, and the jury will not be informed of her remarriage.
“Evidence will not be admitted showing that the plaintiff has remarried since the date of this accident and the death of her former husband.”
The court's core ruling suppressing direct evidence of remarriage in the wrongful death damages calculation.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBruce W. Schmidt died in an accident involving Atlantic Coast Line R.R. Co. His widow, Patricia G. Schmidt, filed a wrongful death action. On Septembe…
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 Jury Prejudice cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause coming on for hearing upon motion for summary final judgment, filed by the defendants, and motion to suppress evidence, filed by the plaintiff, the court having heard argument of counsel, and having considered a portion of the deposition of the plaintiff taken December 6, 1966 in which the plaintiff testified that on September 23, 1966, in Sarasota, Florida, she married a Mr. Clark, said marriage taking place after the accident and death of her former husband, Bruce W. Schmidt, and prior to the date for the trial of this action, and being advised in the premises, it is considered, ordered and adjudged —
(a) That the motion for summary final judgment, filed by the defendants, be and the same is hereby denied.
(b) That the motion to suppress evidence, filed by the plaintiff, be, and the same is hereby granted as to the following particulars —
(1) Evidence will not be admitted showing that the plaintiff has remarried since the date of this accident and the death of her former husband.
(2) Evidence will not be admitted showing the possibility of remarriage by the plaintiff at any time since the accident and during the remaining lifetime of the plaintiff.
(3) Plaintiff will be referred to as Patricia G. Schmidt throughout the trial of this action, and the jury will not be advised that she has in fact remarried and that her legal name is now Patricia G. Clark.
(4) That this order results from a proffer by the defendants to introduce evidence showing the remarriage of the plaintiff or in the alternative showing the possibility of remarriage following the accident and during the re*184mainder of her lifetime on the issue of damages, and objections to same made by the plaintiff and said objections being sustained.