Elizabeth Howland v. Muriel Bevis

Fifth Circuit

Elizabeth Howland v. Muriel Bevis

276 F.2d 906, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 4819

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 18, 1960

Docket17923_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 276 F.2d 906 (Elizabeth Howland v. Muriel Bevis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Elizabeth Howland v. Muriel Bevis, 276 F.2d 906, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 4819 (5th Cir. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed. This personal injury suit was brought against a non-resident of Florida. Service was effected under the provisions of Sections 47.29 and 47.30 of the Florida Statutes (1953), F.S.A. This law permits service on the Secretary of State as to a non-resident who is charged with negligent injury in an automobile accident in Florida either while non-resident or after changing a Florida residence at time of injury to non-residence at time of suit and service. It was thus sufficient, for the purpose of charging jurisdiction in the District and in Florida, to allege that at the time of the suit the defendant was a resident of Texas and that the injury had occurred in Florida. It was not necessary to allege that the defendant was either a resident or a non-resident of Florida at the time of the injury. The statutes were applicable in either event. The case of Red Top Cab & Baggage Co. for Use and Benefit of Fountaine v. Holt, 154 Fla. 77, 16 So.2d 649 is inapplicable because it construed an earlier statute which by its terms applied only to persons who were non-residents at the time of the injury.

The only remaining contentions were as to the facts. There was sufficient evidence to warrant submission of these issues to the jury. We find no other error. The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed. This personal injury suit was brought against a non-resident of Florida. Service was effected under the provisions of Sections 47.29 and 47.30 of the Florida Statutes (1953), F.S.A. This law permits service on the Secretary of State as to a non-resident who is charged with negligent injury in an automobile accident in Florida either while non-resident or after changing a Florida residence at time of injury to non-residence at time of suit and service. It was thus sufficient, for the purpose of charging jurisdiction in the District and in Florida, to allege that at the time of the suit the defendant was a resident of Texas and that the injury had occurred in Florida. It was not necessary to allege that the defendant was either a resident or a non-resident of Florida at the time of the injury. The statutes were applicable in either event. The case of Red Top Cab & Baggage Co. for Use and Benefit of Fountaine v. Holt, 154 Fla. 77, 16 So.2d 649 is inapplicable because it construed an earlier statute which by its terms applied only to persons who were non-residents at the time of the injury.

The only remaining contentions were as to the facts. There was sufficient evidence to warrant submission of these issues to the jury. We find no other error. The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

276 F.2d 906, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 4819, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elizabeth-howland-v-muriel-bevis-ca5-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack