King v. Jacksonville Coach Co.

114 So. 2d 224, 1959 Fla. App. LEXIS 2721
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in King v. Jacksonville Coach Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2352
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 28, 1959·No. No. A-393·Published

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

In this automobile-bus collision case, after the jury brought in a verdict for the plaintiff, the defendant filed a motion for judgment in accordance with its motion for directed verdict or, in the alternative, a motion for a new trial. The circuit court entered an order, which is appealed from herein, granting the motion for judgment but not ruling on the alternative motion for new trial. We think the evidence at the trial was sufficient to make applicable the doctrine of last clear chance, and that there were questions of fact under that doctrine which were properly for the determination of the jury. A motion for directed verdict was not properly grantable and we, therefore, reverse the order appealed from, with directions to consider and determine the said alternative motion for a new trial.

WIGGINTON, Acting Chief Judge, CARROLL, DONALD K., J., and FUSSELL, CARROLL W., Associate Judge, concur.

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

King v. Jacksonville Coach Co., 114 So. 2d 224, 1959 Fla. App. LEXIS 2721 (Fla. Ct. App. 1959).

114 So. 2d 224 (King v. Jacksonville Coach Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Greyhound Corp. v. Kelly
104 So. 2d 471 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1958)
Longo v. Collins
106 So. 2d 1 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1958)