ALLIED VAN LINES, INC., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
ROBERTA MCKNAB, 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 court held that the plaintiff's testimony regarding the value of destroyed household goods was not competent, substantial evidence because it was illogical for old items to increase in value.
[1] The proper measure of damages for the loss of personal property is its market value on the date of the loss.
[2] Testimony regarding the value of destroyed personal property must accord with logic and reason.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff's household goods were destroyed by fire while stored in a warehouse. The plaintiff testified that the value of the goods at the time of des…
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 Market Value cases and more on FLexlaw
HOBSON, Judge.
Defendants-appellants appeal a final judgment in an action to recover damages for the loss of goods of the plaintiff-appel-lee.
Plaintiff filed a complaint for damages wherein she alleged that she had contracted with the defendant Allied to have her furniture and other household belongings transported from California to Naples, Florida. When the goods arrived in Naples, the plaintiff had not found a permanent place to live and the goods were stored in a warehouse of defendant Verna E. Pearman, d/b/a Fred’s Moving and Storage, an agent of the defendant Allied. All the goods were destroyed by a fire while stored in the warehouse.
The first two points on appeal have been considered and we find competent, substantial evidence to support the plaintiff’s position. Brannon v. Smith Dray Line & Storage Company, 6th Cir. 1972, 456 F. 2d 260.
The remaining point relates to the value of the destroyed personal goods. The plaintiff testified as to the original cost of the items and further related that the value of the items at the time of their destruction was greater than the original purchase price. She further testified that the total value of the goods was $35,315, which was the exact amount of the final judgment.
We find it inconceivable that household goods, some of which were 20 years old and none of which were brand new, could-increase in value from their original cost. This testimony as to the value of the destroyed items is not competent, substantial evidence which accords with logic and reason. In measuring plaintiff’s damages, the proper measure of damages for loss of personal property is its market value on the date of the loss. Allstates Van Lines Corp. v. Lebenstein, Fla.App.3d 1974, 303 So. 2d 33; Hillside Van Lines, Inc. v. Matalon, Fla.App.3d 1974, 297 So. 2d 848; and McDonald Air Conditioning, Inc. v. John Brown, Inc., Fla.App.4th 1973, 285 So. 2d 697.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial on damages only.
McNULTY, C. J., and BOARDMAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Polyglycoat Corp. v. Hirsch Distribs., Inc., 442 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)…*960] However, if the business is completely destroyed, the proper total measure of damages is market value on date of loss. Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. Little, 384 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). Aetna relied upon Allied Van Lines, Inc. v. McKnab, 331 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976), wherein the court stated that the proper measure of damages for loss of personal property is its market value on the date of the loss, as compared to partially destroyed property whose damages is the difference between the value…
-
Allied van Lines, Inc. v. Ila M. Bratton, 351 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 1977)…read the document and therefore did not assent to its provisions? The Fourth District Court of Appeal [Allied Van Lines, Inc. v. Bratton, 330 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)] and the Second District Court of Appeal [Allied Van Lines, Inc. v. McKnab, 331 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)] answered this question in the affirmative. Conflict is asserted with Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company v. Dexter, 50 Fla. 180, 39 So. 634 (1905). We have jurisdiction.1 [*346] Mrs. Bratton, the “shipper,” hired Allied Van Line…
-
AETNA Life & Cas. Co. v. Douglas and Sara Ann Little, 384 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…Van Lines, Inc. v. Matalon, 297 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). However, where the property or business is totally destroyed we hold the proper total measure of damages to be the market value on the date of the loss, Allied Van Lines, Inc. v. McKnab, 331 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976). It is argued that the question of the lost profits has not been preserved for appeal. We have examined the transcript and conclude that though the dialogue is no model of clarity, the issue was sufficiently preserved. According…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- McDONALD AIR Conditioning, Inc. v. John Brown, Inc., 285 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973)
- Hillside van Lines, Inc. v. Matalon, 297 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Allstates van Lines Corp. v. Lebenstein, 303 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Brannon v. Smith Dray Line & Storage Co., Inc., 456 F.2d 260 (6th Cir. 1972)