BEN DAVIS, DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE STYLE OF CENTENNIAL ICE COMPANY,
v.
J. K. WILLIAMS, ET UX.
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 is a personal injury action where a jury awarded damages to both Ruth M. Williams ($3,500) and J. K. Williams ($900) against Ben Davis, doing business as Centennial Ice Company. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, finding the evidence sufficient and the jury instructions free of reversible error.
The court held that both questions must be answered in the affirmative—the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict and the jury instructions were free of reversible error. When considered in their entirety, the evidence and instructions presented no basis for reversal.
“After all, however, there are only two questions which we are required to resolve. They are, (1st) Was the evidence sufficient to support the verdict and judgment? And (2nd) Were the instructions given the jury by the court without reversible error? Both questions must be answered in the affirmative.”
Establishes the two issues on appeal and the court's affirmative answer to both
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involves a personal injury action brought by Ruth M. Williams and J. K. Williams against Ben Davis, doing business as Centennial Ice Company.…
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 Personal Injury cases and more on FLexlaw
— Writ of error brings for review judgment' in favor of plaintiffs in personal injury action wherein the verdict was:
“We, the Jury, find for the Plaintiff, Ruth M. Williams, and assess her damage in the sum of Thirty-five Hundred ($3500.00) Dollars and the damages of J. K. Williams in the sum of Nine Hundred ($900.00) Dollars.
So say we all. “jr_ r. Mendenhall, Foreman.”
(Dated March 13, 1937.)
The record comprises some three hundred and fifty pages. The case has been exhaustively briefed, plaintiff in error having devoted forty-four pages to his brief, and defendant in error having consumed some 'two hundred pages in his reply, the great part of which consists of quotations from the record which have been helpful to us.
*880After all, however, there are only two questions which we are required to resolve. They are, (1st) Was the evidence sufficient to support the verdict and judgment? And (2nd) Were the instructions given the jury by the court without reversible error? Both questions must be answered in the affirmative.
Plaintiff in error has challenged certain parts of the testimony as being insufficient to constitute basis for the verdict and judgment and certain paragraphs of the instructions given the jury by the court. But, when the evidence is considered in its entirety, it is found sufficient and when the instructions to the jury are considered as a whole they appear to be without reversible error.
On consideration of the entire record, no reversible error is made to appear and, therefore, the judgment should be and is affirmed.
So ordered.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, Buford, and Chapman, J. J., concur.
Ellis, C. J., and Brown, J., dissents. •