Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Auto Mutual Indemnity Co. v. Shaw, (1938)

Court: Supreme Court of Florida Number:  Visitors: 37
Judges: PER CURIAM.
Attorneys: G.B. Fishback, C.L. Waller, B.A. Meginniss and Chas. H. Spitz, for Plaintiff in Error. Maguire Voorhis, for Defendant in Error.
Filed: Nov. 09, 1938
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: This cause is here on writ of error to a judgment in behalf of the plaintiff below entered by the Circuit Court of Orange County, Florida. The suit was brought on an insurance policy which was given to protect and save harmless on account of damages and injuries resulting from accidents or collisions while one J.B. Jarrell was conducting or doing a taxi cab business in the City of Orlando. The declaration is in two counts. The first alleged the recovery of a judgment by plaintiff against J.B. *P
More

On petition for rehearing it is suggested that a clerical misprision occurred by omitting from the final judgment appearing in the transcript of the record the sum of $533.97 as interest and because of said error this item was omitted in the original opinion filed in this cause. The correct amount to be recovered under the first count of the declaration is, viz.: *Page 833

Face of policy ........................ $5,000.00 Costs taxed in Shaw v. Jarrell ........ 63.80 Interest on Judgment Shaw v. Jarrell .. 533.97 Surgical aid as provided in policy .... 533.05 Attorney's fee herein ................. 800.00 _________ TOTAL .......... $6,930.82

The defendant having paid into court the sum of $5,764.59, there remains a balance due to the plaintiff under count one of the declaration the sum of $1166.23, plus costs in the amount of $82.62, making the total balance due the plaintiff below under count one of the declaration the sum of $1248.85.

The original opinion is modified on petition for rehearing to read: The judgment appealed from is affirmed as to the first count to the extent that the $1166.23 and costs in the amount of $82.62, making a total amount of $1248.85 as recoverable thereunder. The judgment as to the second count is reversed and a new trial granted. It is so ordered.

TERRELL, C.J., and WHITFIELD, BROWN, BUFORD and CHAPMAN, J.J., concur.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer