TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kneeland v. Tampa Northern R. R. Co.

H. F. Kneeland, Plaintiff in Error, v. Tampa Northern Railroad Company, a Corporation, Defendant in Error

Kneeland v. Tampa Northern R. R. Co., 116 So. 48 (Fla. 1927)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Florida · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 19, 1927
Judges
Brown, Buford, Chillingworth, Ellis, Strum, Terrell, Whitfield
Citations
116 So. 4894 Fla. 702

Opinion of the Court

Plaintiff in error sued the railroad company for injuries which he alleged he had received while attempting to cross the railroad right-of-way at a grade crossing in Brooksville, Florida.

A demurrer was sustained to the declaration. Plaintiff declined to amend and a final judgment was entered against him.

We believe it would be of no assistance to copy the declaration in this opinion. When a declaration states a cause of action, surplus allegations not eliminated by appropriate motion may be disregarded. Stinson v. Prevatt, 84 Fla. 416 , 94 So. 656 . In actions where negligence is the basis of recovery, it is not necessary for the declaration to set out the facts constituting the negligence, but an allegation of sufficient acts causing the injury, coupled with an averment that they were negligently done, will be sufficient. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. Rentz, 60 Fla. 429 , 54 So. 13 ; Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. Good, 79 Fla. 589 , 84 So. 733 .

While the declaration contains surplusage, it does state a cause of action.

Reversed. *Page 704

Addendum — Per Curiam

The record in this cause having been considered by this Court, and the foregoing opinion prepared under Chapter 7837, Acts of 1919, adopted by the Court as its opinion, it is considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the judgment of the Circuit Court in this cause be, and the same is hereby reversed.

ELLIS, C. J., AND WHITFIELD, TERRELL, STRUM, BROWN, AND BUFORD, J. J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1931: 11932: 11937: 11942: 11945: 11954: 21964: 12011: 119312026peak 1954 · 2

Most recent

  1. American Optical Corp. v. Spiewak73 So. 3d 120 (Fla. 2011)
  2. Keating v. State ex rel. Ausebel167 So. 2d 46 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)
  3. Schreiber v. Baca276 P.2d 902 (N.M. 1954)
  4. State ex rel. West v. Gray74 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 1954)
  5. Florida Industrial Commission v. State ex rel. Orange State Oil Co.21 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 1945)
  6. Hudson, Et Vir v. Weiland8 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 1942)

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.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. Good, 84 So. 733 (Fla. 1920) 11
R. L. Stinson & East Coast Lumber Co. v. Prevatt, 84 Fla. 416 (1922) 38
Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. Rentz, 60 Fla. 429 (1910) 30

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list