TAMPA TRANSIT LINES, INC., A CORPORATION ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DELFINA RODRIGUEZ AND SAM RODRIGUEZ, APPELLEES
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 court held that no reversible error was made to appear from the record, briefs, or arguments.
Appellant's bus collided with the rear of appellee's automobile after appellee stopped for a yellow traffic light. The jury awarded damages to the app…
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 Presumption Of Correctness Of Trial Court Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
The jury awarded verdicts to appellee wife of $4,500 and to appellee husband for $3,000, based upon damages sustained by them due to the colliding of appellant’s bus into the rear of the automobile owned by the appellee husband and driven by the appellee wife. The appeal is taken from the judgment entered against the appellant.
The appellee wife was driving the automobile involved in an easterly direction on Seventh Avenue near the intersection of Fourteenth Street in the Ybor City section of the City of Tampa. At this intersection the electric traffic light signal of the red-yellow-green type changed from green to yellow, at which time appellee stopped her vehicle, following which appellant’s bus struck the rear of the automobile driven by appellee, from which impact she suffered a neck “whiplash” with resultant injury and attendant pain and suffering. The scene of the accident was in a principal business district, and the traffic was heavy at the time the accident occurred. ' '
Appellant has not contended before this court that under the evidence the case should not have been submitted to the jury; but, primarily, his appeal rests on the con-téntion, in effect, that the trial judge inadequately instructed the jury as to the applicable law, that the trial court erred in not giving appellant’s requested instructions, and that the verdicts are excessive.
Every presumption favors the correctness of the judgment of the trial court, and the one who complains of error must make such error clearly appear; nor is it within the province of an appellate court to substitute its judgment for that of the trial court unless the findings are clearly against the weight of the evidence. We have carefully examined the record and the briefs filed; have duly considered argument of counsel before this court and have concluded that, in the light of the pleadings as made and the evidence adduced thereunder, no reversible error has been made to appear. Accordingly, the judgment here reviewed should be and it is hereby affirmed.
KANNER, C. J., and ALLEN and SHANNON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cheshire v. State Rd. Dep't of Fla., 186 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966)…pectfully dissent. . Florida Power and Light Company v. Ahearn, Fla.1960, 118 So. 2d 21; 2 Fla. Jur., Appeals § 314; 1 F.L.P., Appeals § 152. . Beagles v. Harrison, Fla.App.1965, 171 So. 2d 64; Tampa Transit Lines, Inc. v. Rodriguez, Fla.App.1958, 100 So. 2d 676; 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals § 316. . Reynolds v. Aument, Fla.App .1962, 137 So. 2d 832; 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals §§ 326, 327; 1 F.L.P., Appeals § 157. . F.S.A. § 90.231. “Expert witnesses; fee.— (1) The term ‘expert witness’ as used herein shall apply to any…
-
Archibald v. Wittmer, 120 So. 2d 236 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)…His ruling will not be reversed unless it is clearly erroneous, Lowenthal v. Laurent, Fla.App.1958, 102 So. 2d 410, 411. The burden rests upon appellants to make reversible error clearly appear, Tampa Transit Lines, Inc. v. Rodriquez, Fla.App. 1958, 100 So. 2d 676. In addition, a stronger showing is required to reverse an order allowing a new trial than one denying it. [*237] Blue & Gray Cab Co. v. Lowe, 143 Fla. 129, 196 So. 425. Briefly stated, the complaint, answer and the testimony disclose that the appe…
-
Hammond v. The Times Publ'g Co., 162 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)…led to demonstrate error in the complained of ruling of the trial judge. Therefore, he has failed to overcome the presumption of correctness with which all trial orders enter the appellate courts. See: Tampa Transit Lines v. Rodriquez, Fla.App.1958, 100 So. 2d 676; Dean v. Marineways, Inc. of Fort Lauderdale, Fla.App.1962, 146 So. 2d 577. The judgment here under review is affirmed. ALLEN, Acting C. J., concurs. WHITE, J., concurs specially.…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence