Butz v. Rineheart
This text of 88 So. 2d 125 (Butz v. Rineheart) 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.
Opinion
This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial to plaintiff after the jury had returned a verdict in favor of defendant. The grounds of the trial judge’s order were (1) undue emphasis on the law of contributory negligence in his charge to the jury, and (2) an erroneous, charge on the law of the road, given at the request of the defendant.
We agree with the trial judge that his earlier charge on the law of the road was more appropriate in the circumstances of this case, and that it was error, under the facts here present, to give the charge requested by the defendant. This charge, and the repetition of the charges relating to contributory negligence, could reasonably have misled the jury to the plaintiff’s detriment; and the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in granting a new trial.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
88 So. 2d 125, 1956 Fla. LEXIS 3766, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/butz-v-rineheart-fla-1956.