Orange Belt Auto Line v. Harford

114 So. 320, 94 Fla. 546
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Orange Belt Auto Line v. Harford. Read the opinion of the Court — 91 Fla. 1011
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided August 1, 1927·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court *547 that excessive damages are awarded in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed, provided a remittitur of $5,000.00 is entered within thirty days; otherwise, the judgment is reversed. Tampa Elec. Co. v. Gaffga, 81 Fla. 268, 87 South. Rep. 922; 83 Fla. 708.

It is so ordered.

Ellis, C. J., and Whitfield, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.

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

Orange Belt Auto Line v. Harford, 114 So. 320, 94 Fla. 546 (Fla. 1927).

114 So. 320 (Orange Belt Auto Line v. Harford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tampa Electric Co. v. Gaffga
87 So. 922 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1921)
Lunham v. DeMerritt
93 So. 148 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1922)