FLORIDA UTILITIES COMPANY, A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
PHOEBE S. WESTER, FOR HERSELF AND FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE CONCORDIA FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY AND CAMDEN FIRE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, AND H. R. WESTER, HER HUSBAND, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR
FLORIDA UTILITIES COMPANY, A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
PHOEBE S. WESTER, FOR HERSELF AND FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF THE CONCORDIA FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY AND CAMDEN FIRE INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, AND H. R. WESTER, HER HUSBAND, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR
146 Fla. 559
Florida Supreme Court (1941)
Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 1 So (2nd) 561
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
The records and the briefs have been examined and the testimony as to the value of the property destroyed is so indefinite and unsatisfactory, that a majority of the Court have reached the conclusion that the judgment should be reversed for a new trial on the issue of the amount of damages only, no other error being made to appear.
It is so ordered.
Whitfield, Terrell, Chapman and Thomas, J. J., concur.
Brown, C. J., Buford-and Adams, J. J., think that no liability is shown and dissent.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Roma Constr. Co., Inc. v. Goodman, 557 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…testimony as to medical causation. We quash the trial court’s order. Our opinion stated specifically that a new trial on damages was required. The opinion did not limit the new trial to the amount of damages, see, e.g., Florida Util. Co. v. Wester, 146 Fla. 559, 1 So. 2d 561 [*59] (1941); Eassa v. Palmer, 140 Fla. 835, 192 So. 410 (1939); Winn & Lovett Grocery Co. v. Archer, 126 Fla. 308, 171 So. 214 (1936), and in the absence of any such limitation, a complete new trial on damages is mandated. Atlantic Co…