C & B Airways Co. v. Ashurst

District Court of Appeal of Florida

C & B Airways Co. v. Ashurst

369 So. 2d 631, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14772

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 20, 1979

DocketNos. 78-1017, 78-1018, 78-1118 and 78-1119

StatusPublished

This text of 369 So. 2d 631 (C & B Airways Co. v. Ashurst) 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

C & B Airways Co. v. Ashurst, 369 So. 2d 631, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14772 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgments appealed from are affirmed as to the appellants C & B Airways Company and National Indemnity Company without prejudice to the appellant National Indemnity Company to properly raise the insurance coverage issue in a subsequent proceeding. In our view, no error has been demonstrated on this record as to these appellants. American District Electric Protective Co. v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co., 139 Fla. 451, 190 So. 820 (1939) (syllabus no. 3); Williams v. Banning, 259 So.2d 725 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972).

The judgments appealed from are reversed as to the appellant Piper Aircraft Corporation on the ground that the plaintiff Caralee Ashurst failed to present evidence at trial to establish that the subject aircraft •herein had a defect sufficient to sustain a cause of action for breach of implied warranty or negligence. Although there was evidence in the record that the accident sued upon was caused by anti-symmetrical flutter, there is no evidence that such flutter was caused by a structural or design defect in the aircraft. The trial court, accordingly, erred in denying Piper Aircraft’s motion for a directed verdict as such motion should have been granted. Hormovitis v. Mutual Lumber Co., 120 So.2d 42, 46 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960); Stolmaker v. Bowerman, 100 So.2d 659, 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958).

Affirmed in.part; reversed in part.

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

PER CURIAM.

The judgments appealed from are affirmed as to the appellants C & B Airways Company and National Indemnity Company without prejudice to the appellant National Indemnity Company to properly raise the insurance coverage issue in a subsequent proceeding. In our view, no error has been demonstrated on this record as to these appellants. American District Electric Protective Co. v. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co., 139 Fla. 451, 190 So. 820 (1939) (syllabus no. 3); Williams v. Banning, 259 So.2d 725 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972).

The judgments appealed from are reversed as to the appellant Piper Aircraft Corporation on the ground that the plaintiff Caralee Ashurst failed to present evidence at trial to establish that the subject aircraft •herein had a defect sufficient to sustain a cause of action for breach of implied warranty or negligence. Although there was evidence in the record that the accident sued upon was caused by anti-symmetrical flutter, there is no evidence that such flutter was caused by a structural or design defect in the aircraft. The trial court, accordingly, erred in denying Piper Aircraft’s motion for a directed verdict as such motion should have been granted. Hormovitis v. Mutual Lumber Co., 120 So.2d 42, 46 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960); Stolmaker v. Bowerman, 100 So.2d 659, 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958).

Affirmed in.part; reversed in part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

369 So. 2d 631, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14772, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/c-b-airways-co-v-ashurst-fladistctapp-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack