Gacs Inc. v. Evans

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gacs Inc. v. Evans

893 So. 2d 705, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 1877, 2005 WL 405489

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 22, 2005·No. No. 1D04-0163·Published

Opinion

WOLF, C.J.

We affirm as to tlie issues raised in the main appeal without comment. As to the issue raised on cross-appeal, we reverse and remand with directions to the trial court to enter judgment against GACS, Inc., in the amount of $454,799.50.

The plain language of section 768.81, Florida Statutes, requires that a plaintiffs percentage of contributory fault in a negligence . action be subtracted from the amount of economic damages determined by the jury, see § 768.81(2), Fla. Stat., before it is determined whether the amount of economic damages in the case exceeds the $500,000 limit for imposing joint and several liability on a defendant found at least 25 percent, but not more than 50 percent, at fault. See § 768.81(3), Fla.. Stat. Because it is clear from the amount awarded in the amended final judgment that the trial court did not properly employ this method of calculation in determining the award, we reverse.

KAHN and POLSTON, JJ., Concur.

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

WOLF, C.J.

We affirm as to tlie issues raised in the main appeal without comment. As to the issue raised on cross-appeal, we reverse and remand with directions to the trial court to enter judgment against GACS, Inc., in the amount of $454,799.50.

The plain language of section 768.81, Florida Statutes, requires that a plaintiffs percentage of contributory fault in a negligence . action be subtracted from the amount of economic damages determined by the jury, see § 768.81(2), Fla. Stat., before it is determined whether the amount of economic damages in the case exceeds the $500,000 limit for imposing joint and several liability on a defendant found at least 25 percent, but not more than 50 percent, at fault. See § 768.81(3), Fla.. Stat. Because it is clear from the amount awarded in the amended final judgment that the trial court did not properly employ this method of calculation in determining the award, we reverse.

KAHN and POLSTON, JJ., Concur.

Gacs Inc. v. Evans, 893 So. 2d 705, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 1877, 2005 WL 405489 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

893 So. 2d 705 (Gacs Inc. v. Evans) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.