CORA JONES GANDY, APPELLANT,
v.
H. H. HUMPHREY, 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.
The appellate court affirmed a jury verdict, finding that the evidence presented was sufficient to establish the appellant's negligence and that the trial court did not err in denying motions for a directed verdict and a new trial. The court also found no substantial merit in the challenges to the jury instructions.
No, the evidence was not insufficient as a matter of law, and the trial court did not err in denying the motions for a directed verdict and a new trial. The challenges to the jury instructions also lacked substantial merit.
“It is our view -that this issue is factual in nature and was properly submitted to and properly resolved by the jury on evidence from which it could have drawn conflicting inferences with respect to appellant's negligence.”
This quote explains the court's reasoning for upholding the jury's decision on the issue of negligence.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant, Cora Jones Gandy, sought to appeal a jury verdict finding her negligent. She contended that the evidence was insufficient to establish …
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 New Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
Request for oral argument in this case not having been timely filed, the points on appeal have been considered solely upon the briefs and record. The primary point involved questions the sufficiency of the evidence to establish appellant’s negligence as a matter of law. With respect to this point, appellant contends the trial court erred in denying her motion for a directed verdict and for a new trial. It is our view -that this issue is factual in nature and was properly submitted to and resolved by the jury on evidence from which it could have drawn conflicting inferences with respect to appellant’s negligence. See Haislet v. Crowley (Fla.App.1964), 170 So.2d 88.
Also involved is an attack upon the propriety of-certain instructions given by the trial court. We have considered this together with the other points on appeal, but find them to be without substantial merit.
Appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment appealed is affirmed.
RAWLS, C. J., and WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sobel v. Mut. Dev., Inc., 313 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)…ght a judicial sale of the “wrap around” mortgage and the notes secured thereby. This interlocutory appeal is therefore dismissed. It is so ordered. JOHNSON and MILLS, JJ., concur. .Guaranty Mortgage and Insurance Co. v. Harris, Fla.App.1st 1966, 182 So. 2d 460. .Vance v. Fields, Fla.App.1st 1965, 172 So. 2d 613 and the authorities therein cited. .Vance v. Fields, supra. . Please see F.S. 679.203 and 25 Fla.Jur., Pledge and Collateral Security, Section 8.…
-
Austin's Rack, Inc. v. Austin, 396 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…ther breach has been committed); Restatement (Second) of Agency § 409(2) (1958) (where agent commits subsequent breaches of duty, a principal is not prevented from electing to treat initial breach as cause for discharge). See also Ehringer v. Gross, 182 So. 2d 460 (Fla.1st DCA 1966). Compare Bernecker v. Bernecker, 60 So. 2d 399 (Fla.1952). In light of our conclusion that Austin may not recover compensation for the unexpired term of the employment agreement, it is unnecessary to consider the company’s furthe…
-
Cora Jones Gandy v. Humphrey, 201 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 1967)…ERVIN, Justice (dissenting). We were requested to review by writ of certiorari the decision of the District Court of Appeal, First District, in this cause which is reported in 182 So. 2d 460. From the record thereof it appears: Respondent H. H. Humphrey, as plaintiff, sued Petitioner, Mrs. Cora Jones Gandy, as a defendant along with two other defendants, viz., Otho Wayne Smith and William Cecil Lewis. The complaint alleges that on May…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Haislet v. Crowley, 170 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)