Griffis v. Hill
This text of 217 So. 2d 358 (Griffis v. Hill) 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.
Opinion
This is an appeal from a final judgment based upon a jury verdict in an action for damages. The main point of contention is the inadequateness of the verdict and judgment. Motion for new trial was denied.
It appears from the evidence that actual medical expenses of approximately $797.90 [359]*359was proved as the only evidence of tangible damages. The jury verdict was for $1785.00
Inasmuch as the jury fixed the amount of its verdict at a figure in excess of proven medical expenses, presumably for any and all other damages accruing to the claimant, including pain and suffering and loss of earnings, we feel compelled to affirm under the authority of City of Miami v. Smith, 165 So.2d 748 (Fla.1964) and Shaw v. Puleo, 159 So.2d 641 (Fla.1964).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
217 So. 2d 358, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 4627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffis-v-hill-fladistctapp-1968.