Florida East Coast Ry. Co. v. Chesser
| Decision Date | 21 December 1918 |
| Citation | 77 Fla. 57,80 So. 750 |
| Parties | FLORIDA EAST COAST RY. CO. v. CHESSER et al. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied March 3, 1919.
Error to Circuit Court, Broward County; H. Pierre Branning, Judge.
Action by J. L. Chesser and G. T. Collins, partners as the New River Fish Company, against the Florida East Coast Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiffs upon a directed verdict, and defendant brings error. Reversed for new trial.
Syllabus by the Court
Pleas stating ultimate facts may be sufficient as bases for proofs, even though the averments are not entirely definite and specific.
In an action for loss of fresh fish, which became valueless because of delay in interstate shipment, the case should be tried by the rules of procedure applicable to interstate shipments.
COUNSEL Shutts, Smith & Bowen, of Miami, for plaintiff in error.
J. F. Bunn, of Ft. Lauderdale, and Atkinson & Burdine, of Miami, for defendants in error.
In an action to recover damages for the loss of fresh fish that became valueless because of delay in an interstate shipment, the court directed a verdict for the plaintiff, and the defendant initial carrier took writ of error.
Error is assigned on orders sustaining demurrers to several special pleas. The defendant in error argues merely that 'the pleas, as framed, do not constitute a sufficient defense.' While the pleas are not entirely definite and specific, they do allege ultimate facts that must be met by proof from the defendant, and if proven may avail the defendant. This being an interstate shipment, the case should be tried by the rules of procedure applicable thereto. See Florida, East Coast Ry. Co. v. Davis, decided at the present term, 76 Fla. ----, 79 So. 637.
Reversed for new trial.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial