Case ID: fla_102/html/0708-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Davis, J. Ellis, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Wright Carlton, Plaintiff in Error, vs. F. T. Vaux, Defendant in Error.
    
    136 So. 344.
    Division B.
    Opinion filed August 3, 1931.
    
      Alto Adams, of Fort Pierce, for Plaintiff in Error;
    
      G. B. Nottingham and Burr S. Btottle, of Fort Pierce, for Defendant in Error.
   Davis, J.

— In this case the evidence does not show liability of the defendant below for the entire amount of the damages recovered. Where the evidence does not show liability for the amount of damages awarded, and is so lacking in essential particulars that are reasonably appropriate for an estimate of the damages which might be recoverable from the defendant, that the court cannot with satisfactory certainty determine what would be a proper remittitur, the judgment must be reversed for a new trial. Southern Utilities Co. v. Davis, 83 Fla. 366, 92 So. 683; Plant City v. Muse, 71 Fla. 126; 70 So. 1005; A. C. L. R. Co. v. Brash, 73 Fla. 478, 74 So. 503.

Reversed.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell, J., concur.

Buford, C.J., and Brown, J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

Ellis, J., dissents.

Ellis, J.,

dissenting: There is sufficient evidence to support the verdict as to Carlton’s liability as joint tort feasor.