Carlton v. Vaux

136 So. 344, 102 Fla. 708
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided August 3, 1931·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinions

Davis, J.

— In this case the evidence does not show liability of the defendant below for the entire amount of the damages recovered. Where the evidence does not show liability for the amount of damages awarded, and is so lacking in essential particulars that are reasonably appropriate for an estimate of the damages which might be recoverable from the defendant, that the court cannot with satisfactory certainty determine what would be a proper remittitur, the judgment must be reversed for a new trial. Southern Utilities Co. v. Davis, 83 Fla. 366, 92 So. 683; Plant City v. Muse, 71 Fla. 126; 70 So. 1005; A. C. L. R. Co. v. Brash, 73 Fla. 478, 74 So. 503.

*709 Reversed.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell, J., concur. Buford, C.J., and Brown, J., concur in the opinion and judgment. Ellis, J., dissents.

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

Carlton v. Vaux, 136 So. 344, 102 Fla. 708 (Fla. 1931).

136 So. 344 (Carlton v. Vaux) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Great Am. Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Suarez, Jr.
146 So. 644 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1932)