Aetna Casualty Co. v. Barrett

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Aetna Casualty Co. v. Barrett

315 So. 2d 496, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14268

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 11, 1975

DocketNo. 74-1266

StatusPublished

This text of 315 So. 2d 496 (Aetna Casualty Co. v. Barrett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aetna Casualty Co. v. Barrett, 315 So. 2d 496, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14268 (Fla. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of the record on appeal and after consideration of the briefs and oral arguments of counsel for the respective parties, we determine that there was no evidence adduced at trial sufficient to establish that appellant, Dorothy Innes Higgs, was culpably negligent in the operation of her automobile at the time of the subject accident. Therefore, the trial court erred in declining to direct the jury to return a verdict in favor of Appellant-Higgs and against Appellee-Glenn Barrett on the issue of punitive damages. See Ingram v. Pettit, 303 So.2d 703 (Fla.App.1974).

Accordingly, the final judgment entered by the trial court is modified by striking the award to Appellee-Barrett of punitive damages in the amount of $5,000. In all other respects, the final judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed as modified.

OWEN, C. J., and WALDEN and CROSS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Upon review of the record on appeal and after consideration of the briefs and oral arguments of counsel for the respective parties, we determine that there was no evidence adduced at trial sufficient to establish that appellant, Dorothy Innes Higgs, was culpably negligent in the operation of her automobile at the time of the subject accident. Therefore, the trial court erred in declining to direct the jury to return a verdict in favor of Appellant-Higgs and against Appellee-Glenn Barrett on the issue of punitive damages. See Ingram v. Pettit, 303 So.2d 703 (Fla.App.1974).

Accordingly, the final judgment entered by the trial court is modified by striking the award to Appellee-Barrett of punitive damages in the amount of $5,000. In all other respects, the final judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed as modified.

OWEN, C. J., and WALDEN and CROSS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

315 So. 2d 496, 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 14268, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aetna-casualty-co-v-barrett-fladistctapp-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack