EARL E. KNABB, APPELLANT,
v.
HORACE TOMPKINS, 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 trial court did not err in directing a verdict on liability against the defendant, and the jury instructions on future damages were sufficient.
The defendant's driver admitted to changing lanes, seeing a car, and colliding with it, which the trial court used to direct a verdict on liability. T…
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 Excessiveness Of Verdict cases and more on FLexlaw
In this case, the trial court directed a verdict on liability against the defendant. This was assigned as error, but we hold that the trial court was not in error in this inasmuch as the driver for appellant admitted in his testimony that he was changing lanes and saw a car coming, and he “pulled back in and my right fender hit his left on the back.” This was sufficient evidence, from which the trial court could determine a violation of the Florida Statutes by the driver of defendant’s truck, without explanation, upon which the order directing the verdict as to liability against the defendant was based.
Appellant next raises the issue of the excessiveness of the verdict. The amount of damages to be awarded was properly a jury question and there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict.
The next question raised by the appellant, the jury instructions on future damages, causes us to take a closer look at the charges to the jury. While the defendant’s counsel had requested the Florida Standard Jury Instruction, we do not find an objection at the close of the charges; but, we do hold the instructions to the jury were comprehensive enough to cover the Standard Jury Instruction so that there was no error, irrespective of whether the objection was given or not.
We are cognizant of the holding of our sister court in Lawn v. Wasserman, 248 *859So.2d 548 (Fla.App. 3rd, 1971), but we do not think the facts of this case fall within the rule of the Lawn case.
For these reasons, the judgment herein appealed is
Affirmed.
CARROLL, DONALD K, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Laverine Thursby and Wynell Thursby v. Reynolds Metals Co., 466 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…equent to purchase will not excuse the manufacturer from negligence in the design of the product, so long as the modifications were not substantial and were foreseeable by the manufacturer. An examination of the charge as a whole, Knabb v. Tompkins, 254 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971), reveals that appellants’ alternative instruction would have been cumulative. Reversible error cannot be predicated upon a rejected proposed instruction fairly covered in the instructions given. McLain v. Daps Discount Auto Parts…
-
Ellison v. Gurney A. Cribb, Jr., 271 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)…be granted. SPECTOR, C. J., and JOHNSON, J., concur. . §§ 317.461 (now 316.217), and 317.872 (now 316.249), F.S. . Parker v. Hofheinz (Fla.App.1966) 181 So. 2d 367; Holland v. Watson (Fla.App.1968) 215 So. 2d 498; Knabb v. Tompkins (Fla.App.1971) 254 So. 2d 858. . Wisdom v. Nickels (Fla.App.1968) 212 So. 2d 652; Booth v. Mary Carter Paint Company (Fla.App.1966) 182 So. 2d 292; Bessett v. Hackett (Fla.1953) 66 So. 2d 694. . Seay v. State, 139 Fla. 433, 190 So. 702. . Drury v. Franke, 247 Ky. 758, 57 S.W.…
-
Darr v. Aglin, 279 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)…168 So. 2d 140 (Fla.1964) ; Al- [*64] terman Transport Lines, Inc. v. McCahon, 168 So. 2d 707 (3 Fla.App.1964) ; Holden v. Dye, 224 So. 2d 350 (1 Fla.App.1969) ; Ben’s Seltzer, Inc. v. Markey, 254 So. 2d 377 (3 Fla.App.1971) ; and Knabb v. Tompkins, 254 So. 2d 858 (1 Fla.App.1971). . Frazier v. Ross, 225 So. 2d 451 (1 Fla.App.1969). . F.S. § 316.276, F.S.A.…
Authorities Cited
- Lawn v. Wasserman, 248 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)