Bryan v. Loftin

51 So. 2d 724, 1951 Fla. LEXIS 1291
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedApril 6, 1951
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 51 So. 2d 724 (Bryan v. Loftin) 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
Bryan v. Loftin, 51 So. 2d 724, 1951 Fla. LEXIS 1291 (Fla. 1951).

Opinion

51 So.2d 724 (1951)

BRYAN
v.
LOFTIN et al.

Supreme Court of Florida, Division B.

April 6, 1951.

*725 John C. Wynn, Miami, for appellant.

Loftin, Anderson, Scott, McCarthy & Preston and Robert H. Anderson and William S. Frates, all of Miami, and Russell L. Frink, Jacksonville, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon a verdict directed in defendants' favor in a suit wherein plaintiff sought to recover for her injuries sustained in a railroad crossing collision. This court has many times held that "The power granted to a trial court to direct a verdict during the trial of a cause where sufficient evidence has not been adduced to make out a case should be cautiously exercised so as not to infringe upon the organic right of trial by jury. If the evidence is conflicting or will permit of different reasonable inferences, or if there is evidence tending to prove the issues, it should be submitted to a jury as a question of fact to be determined by it, and not taken from the jury and passed upon by the Court as a question of law." See Saunders v. Lischkoff, 137 Fla. 826, 188 So. 815, and cases therein cited; Moore v. Dietrich, 133 Fla. 809, 183 So. 2; Johnson v. Louisville & N.R. Co., 59 Fla. 305, 52 So. 195, 196. In the case last cited, it was stated that "The court should not direct a verdict for the defendant, unless it is clear that there is no evidence whatever adduced that could in law support a verdict for plaintiff."

We are persuaded that the testimony adduced by the plaintiff, when considered in the light of the foregoing rules and the provisions of Sections 768.05 and 768.06, Florida Statutes 1949, F.S.A., did not warrant the withdrawal of the case from the jury.

The judgment is, accordingly, reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

SEBRING, C.J., and CHAPMAN, ADAMS and ROBERTS, JJ., Concur.

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

Related

Easton-Babcock & Associates, Inc. v. Fernandez
706 So. 2d 916 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Blakely v. Pahler
253 So. 2d 140 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1971)
Bell's Fish & Poultry Co. v. Jenkins
227 So. 2d 512 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)
Tillery v. Standard Sand & Silica Co.
226 So. 2d 842 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)
Hughes v. Landers
215 So. 2d 773 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)
Paikin v. Beach Cabs, Inc.
187 So. 2d 93 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)
Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car System of Florida, Inc.
141 So. 2d 609 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1962)
Harvey v. Maistrosky
114 So. 2d 810 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1959)
Butler v. Barr
114 So. 2d 700 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1959)
Teare v. Local Union No. 295
98 So. 2d 79 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1957)
Hilkmeyer v. Latin American Air Cargo Expediters
94 So. 2d 821 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1957)
Chaney v. Headley
90 So. 2d 297 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1956)
Burdette v. Phillips
76 So. 2d 805 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1954)
Chambers v. Loftin
67 So. 2d 220 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1953)
Mullis v. City of Miami
60 So. 2d 174 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
51 So. 2d 724, 1951 Fla. LEXIS 1291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bryan-v-loftin-fla-1951.