Carlton v. Vaux
Wright Carlton, Plaintiff in Error, vs. F. T. Vaux, Defendant in Error
Opinion of the Court
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 .
*709 Reversed.
Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell, J., concur.
Buford, C.J., and Brown, J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Ellis, J., dissents.
Dissent
Ellis, J., dissenting: There is sufficient evidence to support the verdict as to Carlton’s liability as joint tort feasor.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.