Fleet Transport Co. v. Woodward

Supreme Court of Florida

Fleet Transport Co. v. Woodward

219 So. 2d 709, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6191

Supreme Court of Florida·Decided March 7, 1969·No. No. 68-324·Published

Opinion

MANN, Judge.

The trial court’s instruction allowing plaintiff to recover lost earnings while unable to operate his tractor-trailer, which before his injury he drove himself, is supported by testimony that he had in the past hired a substitute driver for $160 per week although he had not hired a substitute during the period for which lost earnings were claimed because he couldn’t hire anyone he would trust with his rig. See Murphy v. Pittsburgh Rys. Co., 292 Pa. 191, 140 A. 897 (1927); Annotation, 122 A.L.R. 297, 320.

Affirmed.

HOBSON, A. C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.

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

MANN, Judge.

The trial court’s instruction allowing plaintiff to recover lost earnings while unable to operate his tractor-trailer, which before his injury he drove himself, is supported by testimony that he had in the past hired a substitute driver for $160 per week although he had not hired a substitute during the period for which lost earnings were claimed because he couldn’t hire anyone he would trust with his rig. See Murphy v. Pittsburgh Rys. Co., 292 Pa. 191, 140 A. 897 (1927); Annotation, 122 A.L.R. 297, 320.

Affirmed.

HOBSON, A. C. J., and McNULTY, J., concur.

Fleet Transport Co. v. Woodward, 219 So. 2d 709, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6191 (Fla. 1969).

Pincite

219 So. 2d 709 (Fleet Transport Co. v. Woodward) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related