ATLAS ROCK COMPANY
v.
ETHEL WILSON, ET VIR.
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 personal injury judgment, holding that the trial court properly struck the defendant's contributory negligence plea and that the jury's award was not excessive given the plaintiff's injuries.
The court held that the plea of contributory negligence was insufficient and properly stricken. The court also found no error in the jury charges and affirmed the judgment, finding the award not excessive.
“Under the facts of this case the plea of contributory negligence was properly stricken. It did not contain allegations sufficient to meet the requirements of good pleading for a plea of that kind.”
Reasoning for striking the contributory negligence plea.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEthel Wilson, a passenger, sued Atlas Rock Company for personal injuries sustained when her vehicle collided with the company's truck. The trial court…
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.
— Ethel Wilson, the defendant in error, recovered a verdict and judgment against the plaintiff in error in a common law action for personal injuries received in a collision with an automobile in which she was riding as a passenger, and- a truck which was at the time owned and operated by plaintiff in error.
It is contended here that the trial court erred in striking a plea of contributory negligence tendered by the defendant, that he erred in giving certain charges to the jury and that on the showing made the judgment was excessive.
Under the facts of this case the plea of contributory negligence was properly stricken. It did not contain allegations sufficient to meet the requirements of good pleading for a plea of that kind. We have read the record carefully and fail to see that the charges complained of were erroneous.
The evidence discloses that as a result of the collision the arm of the defendant in error, a negro woman, was broken and her shoulder was badly damaged, that she was an ordinary laborer, that she was laid up for three or four months before she could work at all and that now she works with pain and her doctor testifies that she will always do so. She incurred doctor bills and hospitals of about $200.00.
In view of such injury and discomfort and the fact that there is an entire absence of showing that the jury *205was influenced by considerations outside the record,' we see no reason to disturb the judgment, so it is affirmed. Affirmed.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.