Malone v. Folger, (1938)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Judges: PER CURIAM.
Attorneys: E.W. R.C. Davis, for Plaintiff in Error;
Maguire Voorhis, and C.E. Lemire, for Defendants in Error.
Filed: Apr. 14, 1938
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: This action was brought by husband and wife to recover damages for injury to the husband's automobile, and for his expenses and loss of the services and consortium of his wife because of her injury, and also to recover for personal injury to the wife, in breaking a bone in her foot and other less serious injuries with consequent *Page 77 pain, all alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant in an automobile accident. The verdict awarded $1,500.00 to the husband and $3,000.00 t
Summary: This action was brought by husband and wife to recover damages for injury to the husband's automobile, and for his expenses and loss of the services and consortium of his wife because of her injury, and also to recover for personal injury to the wife, in breaking a bone in her foot and other less serious injuries with consequent *Page 77 pain, all alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant in an automobile accident. The verdict awarded $1,500.00 to the husband and $3,000.00 to..
More
I concur in the holding that liability appears, but I cannot concur in the requirement of a remittitur. In this case exemplary or punitive damages were claimed by the plaintiffs and allowed, at least as to Mrs. Folger, by the jury. There was undoubtedly abundant evidence in this case to sustain the allowance of such exemplary damages which the holding of the majority impliedly admits. The amount of such damages was in this case as in other cases of this nature, peculiarly a jury question, and under this evidence I do not think this Court would be justified in disturbing the verdict as rendered. The judgment should, in my opinion, be affirmed in toto.
Source: CourtListener
