American District Electric v. Seaboard Air Line, (1937)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 11
Judges: CHAPMAN, J.
Attorneys: Julian Hartridge and Francis C. Stark (of New York), for Plaintiff in Error;
Fleming, Hamilton, Diver Lichliter, C.H. Lichliter and Charles R. Scott, for Defendant in Error.
Filed: Mar. 29, 1937
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 520 Following reversal of the judgment first entered in this cause (Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. American Dist. Elec. Protective Co., 106 Fla. 330 , 143 Sou. Rep. 316) the case again came on for trial upon issues made by the pleadings. It was submitted to a jury, and verdict on the merits returned in favor of the defendant below, plaintiff in error here. The
Summary: [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 520 Following reversal of the judgment first entered in this cause (Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. American Dist. Elec. Protective Co., 106 Fla. 330 , 143 Sou. Rep. 316) the case again came on for trial upon issues made by the pleadings. It was submitted to a jury, and verdict on the merits returned in favor of the defendant below, plaintiff in error here. The t..
More
A very good short treatment of the doctrine of res ipsaloquitur will also be found in 20 R.C.L. 184, et seq., and 45 C.J. 1193, et seq.
Source: CourtListener
