ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. R. CO.
v.
SAM KINLAW

Fla. | 1934-11-02
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur., Davis, C. J., and Ellis and Terrell, J. J.,. concur in the opinion and judgment.-
117 Fla. 166 Florida Supreme Court (1934) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 157 So. 341
Cited by 1 case

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court reversed a $25,000 judgment for a switchman injured on the job, finding the award excessive and remanding for a new trial.


Holding

Yes, the verdict was excessive and requires reversal and remand for a new trial.


Key Quotes

“Under the facts as disclosed by the record, a jury might have found a verdict in favor of either the plaintiff or the defendant, as there was some substantial evidence upon which either verdict could have found basis.”

Establishes that the jury had a basis for a verdict for either party.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

A switchman employed by the railroad jumped off a moving train in the dark, tripped over a switch block, and was injured by another train running para…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

In this case defendant in error was a switchman working for the plaintiff in error. In the performance of his duties he jumped off a moving train in the *167dark, tripped over a switch block and his foot was mashed under another train which was then running parallel to and in the same direction as the train was' moving upon which the switchman was working.

We do not think that an extended discussion of the case could serve any useful purpose. Under the facts as disclosed by the record, a jury might have found a verdict in favor of either the plaintiff or the defendant, as there was some substantial evidence upon which either verdict could have found basis.

. We have found no reversible error in rulings upon pleadings or as to rulings on procedural questions.

The injury proven was the loss of the foot and a part of the leg, the same having been amputated between the knee and the ankle. The record shows that there were two amputations and the record also shows that there was considerable pain and suffering experienced by the switchman.

The verdict and judgment was for $25,000.00.

' We think the judgment is so excessive as to require a reversal thereof with directions that the cause be remanded for new trial. ..............

It is so ordered.

Reversed and remanded.

Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.

Davis, C. J., and Ellis and Terrell, J. J.,. concur in the opinion and judgment.-


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Alton LOY v. State, 87 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1956)
    …PER CURIAM. Reversed under the authority of Aldridge v. State, Fla.1953, 63 So. 2d 194; Allen v. State, 1934, 117 Fla. 163, 157 So. 341 and Neumann v. State, 116 Fla. 98, 156 So. 237. DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw