FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILWAY COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES B. BLAIR, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1966-02-15
No. 65-511
Before TILLMAN PEARSON, CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ.
183 So. 2d 257 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1966) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

On this appeal from a judgment for the plaintiff in a Federal Employers’ Liability Act case (45 U.S.C.A. § 51 et seq.), the principal question presented is whether the trial judge committed prejudicial error when he charged the jury upon the issue of future pain and suffering. We find that the record contains evidence to support a charge upon the issue. See Tampa Transit Lines, Inc. v. Smith, Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 557; Alamo v. Del Rosario, 69 App.D.C. 47, 98 F.2d 328 (1938). See also Sentilles v. Inter-Caribbean Shipping Corp., 361 U.S. 107, 80 S.Ct. 173, 4 L.Ed.2d 142 (1959).

A second point urges error because of a charge on loss of earnings. Appellant has failed to establish that the issue was not presented by the evidence.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …ard. It was a strike against the government which all authorities agree cannot be tolerated in the absence of expressed consent by the government. Local 1526, International Longshoremen’s Association, A.F.L.-C.I.O., v. Broward County Port Authority, 183 So. 2d 257 (4th Dist.Ct.App. Fla.1966); Board of Education of the City of New York v. Shanker, 54 Misc.2d 941, 283 N.Y.S.2d 548 (1967); Amell v. United States, 384 U.S. 158, 86 S.Ct. 1384, 16 L.Ed.2d 445 (1966); Miami Water Works Local No. 654 v. City of Miami…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw