Schneider v. Saxon

82 So. 2d 501
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided September 21, 1955·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

TERRELL, Justice.

Plaintiff instituted this suit -.against defendant to recover damages for personal injuries under the guest statute, Chapter-320.59,: F.S.A. A motion to dismiss the amended 'complaint was granted -on the theory-that it showed a mere errdf of judgment on the -part of 'defendant, whose guest the plaintiff-was and that gross negligence-was not shown. Final judgment was entered for defendant and the plaintiff1 appealed.

The only point for determination- is whether or not the complaint stated a cause of action under the guest statute.

■A majority -of the 'court have-- reached the -conclusion that this question requires an- affirmative" answer and' being so, the judgment appealed -from should he reversed on authority- of Dexter v. Green, Fla.1951, 55 So.2d 548, and Bridges v. Speer, Fla., 79 So.2d 679, decided. May 13, 19-55, headnotes 5, 6 and 7. It should not'he overlooked'-that'gro'ss-negligence in such cases is question for-the-jury.

Reversed.

DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, HOB-SON, ROBERTS and THORNAL, JJ., concur. SEBRING, J., dissents.

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

Schneider v. Saxon, 82 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1955).

82 So. 2d 501 (Schneider v. Saxon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Foy v. Fleming
168 So. 2d 177 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1964)
Welch v. Moothart
89 So. 2d 485 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1956)
Clements ex rel. Clements v. Deeb
88 So. 2d 505 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1956)
Faircloth v. Hill
85 So. 2d 870 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1956)