Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Turman

86 So. 199, 80 Fla. 285
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJuly 12, 1920
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 86 So. 199 (Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Turman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Turman, 86 So. 199, 80 Fla. 285 (Fla. 1920).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This writ of error was taken to a judgment awarding $10,000.00 damages for personal injuries. At the trial the court admitted in evidence a letter relative to the injury, written by Turman to the defendant’s law agent, in which the plaintiff wrote: “the left side of my face and both legs were badly burned,” and “I was earning $1.65 per day,” but excluded the words “I expect the railroad to pay me $2,000.00 for my damages.”

It appears from the letter that it was not an offer to accept a reduced amount as a compromise, but a statement of the injuries received and the value thereof. The letter should have been admitted as an entirety.

In view of the damages awarded, the exclusion of the statement of the plaintiff as to the damages sustained was harmful to the defendant. On another trial, if it clearly appears that' the Federal law is applicable, the charges given will be framed to conform to the controlling law.

Judgment reversed for a new trial.

Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.

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

Related

Nautica International, Inc. v. Intermarine USA, L.P.
5 F. Supp. 2d 1333 (S.D. Florida, 1998)
State, Dept. of Transp. v. Knowles
402 So. 2d 1155 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1981)
Washington Nat'l Arena v. TREASURER, PR. GEO'S CO.
410 A.2d 1060 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1980)
STATE, DEPT. OF TRANSP. v. Cone Bros. Contracting Co.
364 So. 2d 482 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1978)
Stone v. Town of Mexico Beach
348 So. 2d 40 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)
Department of Revenue v. Leadership Hous., Inc.
343 So. 2d 611 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1977)
Ago
Florida Attorney General Reports, 1976
Trustees of Tufts College v. Triple R. Ranch, Inc.
275 So. 2d 521 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1973)
PUB. SERV. COOR. TRANS. v. Del. River Port Auth.
276 A.2d 378 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1971)
Petition of Rocafort
186 So. 2d 496 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1966)
Hutton v. Autoridad Sobre Hogares De La Capital
78 F. Supp. 988 (D. Puerto Rico, 1948)
Bedell v. Lassiter
196 So. 699 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)
Robinson v. Florida Dry Cleaning & Laundry Board
194 So. 269 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)
Crooks v. State Ex Rel. Pierce
194 So. 237 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)
State Ex Rel. Seville Holding Co. v. Draughon
173 So. 353 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1937)
Anders v. Nicholson
150 So. 639 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1933)
Spencer v. Hunt
147 So. 282 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1933)
Horton v. Kyle
88 So. 757 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1921)
Chase v. County of Orange
87 So. 770 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
86 So. 199, 80 Fla. 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atlantic-coast-line-railroad-v-turman-fla-1920.