J. D. HILL AND ALMA MARIE HILL, JOINED BY HER HUSBAND J. D. HILL,
v.
MRS. E. T. WILSON, A WIDOW, ET AL.
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 Florida Supreme Court reversed a directed verdict for the defendants, finding that the trial court erred in instructing the jury to find for the defendants at the close of the plaintiffs' evidence. The appellate court determined that there was sufficient evidence and reasonable inferences to present the case to the jury.
Yes, the trial court erred in instructing a verdict for the defendants. The evidence presented by the plaintiffs, and reasonable inferences therefrom, should have been submitted to the jury for determination.
“It is well settled that a party moving for a directed verdict admits, not only the facts shown by the evidence, but also every reasonable inference favorable to the adverse party that the jury might fairly and reasonably arrive at from the evidence.”
This quote establishes the legal standard for reviewing a motion for a directed verdict, emphasizing the admissions made by the moving party.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAt the close of the plaintiffs' evidence, the defendants moved for and were granted a directed verdict by the trial court. The jury returned a verdict…
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 Conflicting Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
On motion of defendants in this case, at the close of plaintiffs’ evidence, a verdict in favor of the defendants was instructed by the trial court, a verdict was returned according to such instruction, and a judgment rendered thereon in favor of the defendants, to which plaintiffs’ sued out this writ of error.
It is well settled that a party moving for a directed verdict admits, not only the facts shown by the evi*473dence, but also every reasonable inference favorable to the adverse party that the jury might fairly and reasonably arrive at from the evidence. And if there is evidence which is conflicting, or evidence which tends to prove the issue, the case should be submitted to the jury as a question of fact to be determined by them, under proper instructions by the Court.
Upon careful consideration of the evidence in this case, a majority of the court are of the opinion that the court below erred in instructing a verdict in favor of the defendants.
Reversed and remanded for a new trial.
Brown, C. J., Whitfield, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.
Terrell, Thomas and Adams, J. J., dissent.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Katz v. Bear, 52 So. 2d 903 (Fla. 1951)…jury might fairly and reasonably arrive at from the evidence, and if the evidence is conflicting, or evidence tending to prove the issues, the case should be submitted to the jury as a question of fact under appropriate instructions. Hill v. Wilson, 148 Fla. 472, 473, 4 So. 2d 712, and similar cases. The judgment is reversed with instructions for further proceedings not inconsistent with the views herein expressed. *905 TERRELL, CHAPMAN, ADAMS and ROBERTS, JJ., concur. SEBRING, C.J., dissents. THOMAS and…
-
McALLISTER v. Miami Daily News, 154 Fla. 370 (Fla. 1944)…at the jury might fairly and reasonably arrive at from the evidence, and if there is evidence which is conflicting or evidence tending to prove the issues, the case should be submitted to the jury, under appropriate instructions. See Hill v. Wilson, 148 Fla. 472, 4 So. (2nd) 712. Likewise it is established law that where the manifest weight and probative force of the adduced evidence clearly requires a verdict for one party and the evidence is legally insufficent to support a verdict for the opposite party…
-
Arnold v. Stewart, 101 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)…at the jury might fairly and reasonably arrive at from the evidence, and if there is evidence which is conflicting or evidence tending to prove the issues, the case should be submitted to the jury, under appropriate instructions. See Hill v. Wilson, 148 Fla. 472, 4 So. 2d 712.” And, again in Cadore v. Karp, Fla.1957, 91 So. 2d 806, 807, the Court, quoting from Moore v. Dietrich, 1938, 133 Fla. 809, 183 So. 2, said: “* * * verdict for the defendant should never be directed by the court unless it is clear t…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence