J. TURNER BUTLER AND WILLIAM A. HALLOWES, AS TRUSTEES OF THE PROPERTY OF FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
CONE BROTHERS CONTRACTING CO., A CORPORATION, APPELLEE
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 negligence case arising from a collision between a railroad passenger train and construction equipment, the appellate court reversed the jury verdict for the appellee due to erroneous jury instructions that improperly shifted the burden of proof to the appellant railroad company and invoked an impermissible statutory presumption of negligence.
The court held that the trial court committed harmful error by instructing the jury in a manner that improperly created a presumption against the appellants based on section 768.05, Florida Statutes, and by imposing on the appellants the burden of proving themselves free of negligence rather than requiring the appellee to prove negligence as required by law.
“One of the instructions was directly predicated upon the presumption statute, section 768.05, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and purported to create a presumption against the appellants. The other instruction had the effect of imposing the burden on appellants of proving themselves free of negligence.”
Describes the two erroneous jury instructions that formed the basis of the appeal and constituted harmful error.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA collision occurred between the appellants' passenger train, "The Florida Special," and a large tractor pulling an earth-mover loaded with dirt owned…
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 Counterclaim cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellants were the plaintiffs and counterdefendants and the appellee was the defendant and counter-claimant in the trial court. The appellants and the appellee each sought property damage claimed to have been caused by negligence of the other as the result of a collision between one of the appellants’ passenger trains, “The Florida Special,” and a large tractor pulling a huge earth-mover loaded with dirt, this equipment being owned by the appellee. The evidence on the issue of negligence was in conflict. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the appellee based on its counterclaim, and it is from this judgment that appellants have instituted this appeal. The appeal is grounded wholly upon two jury instructions asserted by appellants to have constituted prejudicial error.
It is unnecessary to quote the instructions assaulted because their propriety as applied to the instant case has been resolved by decisions of the Florida Supreme Court. One of the instructions was directly predicated upon the presumption statute, section 768.05, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and purported to create a presumption against the appellants. The other instruction had the effect of imposing the burden on appellants of proving themselves free of negligence. Upon the record, we must agree with the appellants that the trial court committed harmful error. See the cases of Loftin v. Skelton, 1943, 152 Fla. 437, 12 So.2d 175; Powell v. American Sumatra Tobacco Co., 1944, 154 Fla. 227, 17 So.2d 391; and Lawson v. Loftin, 1945, 155 Fla. 685, 21 So.2d 202.
The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.
Reversed.
KANNER, C. J., ALLEN, J., and PATTERSON, TERRY B., A. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Loftin v. Skelton, 152 Fla. 437 (Fla. 1943)
- Conran v. State, 154 Fla. 227 (Fla. 1944)
- Corinne Lawson v. Loftin, 155 Fla. 685 (Fla. 1945)
- Powell v. Am. Sumatra Tobacco Co. & O. L. Smith, 154 Fla. 227 (Fla. 1944)