JOHN W. DAVIS, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY, A FLORIDA 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.
This case concerns an appeal by a plaintiff in a Federal Employers' Liability Act case who was dissatisfied with his recovery. The plaintiff argued that the trial court improperly submitted the issue of contributory negligence to the jury, which he believed led to an insufficient verdict.
No, the trial court did not err in submitting the issue of contributory negligence to the jury. There was sufficient evidence from which a jury could reasonably find the plaintiff negligent.
“The plaintiff in an action under the Federal Employers' Liability Act being dissatisfied with the amount of his recovery appeals the final judgment.”
Establishes the basis for the appeal and the plaintiff's dissatisfaction with the jury's award.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff sued under the Federal Employers' Liability Act and was awarded a judgment, but he appealed, believing the amount was too low. The trial…
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 Federal Employers' Liability Act cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiff in an action under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act being dissatisfied with the amount of his recovery appeals the final judgment. He assigns as error the denial of his motion for a directed verdict upon the issue of contributory negligence. The trial judge did rule that the defendant was liable under the act, but submitted the issue of contributory negligence to the jury. Appellant urges that under the comparative negligence rule applicable in Federal Employers’ Liability cases, the improper submission of the contributory negligence issue resulted in an improperly rendered verdict.
This position assumes that the jury did find the plaintiff guilty of some contributory negligence. The question then is: Is there any evidence to support a presumed finding of the jury that the plaintiff was in some degree guilty of conduct proximately contributing to the accident ?
We have reviewed the record and find evidence from which a jury of reasonable men could find that the plaintiff was negligent in failing to brace himself, after warning, for the jerk of the train which caused his injury.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stager v. Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co., 163 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)…dered by the jury. As to the third point, no error has been demonstrated in failing to direct a verdict for the plaintiff when the record is examined in light of the following authorities : Davis v. Florida East Coast Railway Company, Fla.App.1962, 138 So. 2d 97; Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. Normile, 2 Cir.1918, 254 F. 680; La Mere v. Railway Transfer Co, 125 Minn. 159, 145 N.W. 1068; Salisbury v. New York Central R. Co, 220 App. Div. 491, 222 N.Y.S. 38. These decisions clearly indicate that when one who knows o…