Grainger v. Fuller
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
| Writing for the Court | WHITFIELD, J. |
| Citation | 72 So. 462,72 Fla. 57 |
| Parties | GRAINGER v. FULLER et al. |
| Decision Date | 06 July 1916 |
72 So. 462
72 Fla. 57
GRAINGER
v.
FULLER et al.
Florida Supreme Court
July 6, 1916
Error to Circuit Court, Volusia County; james W. Perkins, Judge.
Action by Ella Fuller and others against Lester Grainger. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant brings error. Reversed, and new trial awarded.
Syllabus by the Court
SYLLABUS
Where the circumstances of a personal injury warrant the recovery of damages for future pain and suffering, the instructions to the jury should limit the recovery to such pain and suffering as the evidence shows the party is reasonably certain to endure as a result of the injury.
COUNSEL [72 So. 463] [72 Fla. 58] Stewart & Stewart, of De Land, and Geo. A. Worley & Son, of Miami, for plaintiff in error.
Landis, Fish & Hull, of De Land, for defendants in error.
OPINION
WHITFIELD, J.
A judgment was obtained against Lester Grainger for $2,000 as damages for personal injuries sustained by Mrs. Fuller because of the alleged negligence of the defendant in running an automobile against a buggy in which the plaintiff was riding on a public road, and the defendant took writ of error.
At the trial the following charges were given and exceptions were duly taken:
'In estimating the damages which the plaintiff will sustain in future, if any, you are to consider the probable length of time she will live, taking into consideration the condition of her health before the injury, her age and habits, and her life expectancy, and the physical pain and mental suffering she will suffer during that time, if any.'
'If you find for plaintiff, you will, in assessing her damages, take into consideration her age and condition in life, the injury sustained by her, if any, and the physical pain and mental anguish suffered and endured by her on account of said injury, if any, and such damages, if any, as you believe from the evidence she will sustain in the future as the direct effect of such injury, including the injury to her health and the physical pain and mental anguish [72 Fla. 59] which you believe from the eivdence she will sustain in future, if any, and assess the damages at such sum as from the evidence you may deem proper, the total amount of such damages not to exceed the sum of $10,000, the amount sued for, but any sum which you shall award for prospective or future damages you must reduce to its present worth or value before including it in your verdict.'
It is argued for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ake v. Birnbaum
...it. See Smith v. Bagwell, 19 Fla. 117, 45 Am.Rep. 12; Harby v. Florida East Coast Hotel Co., 59 Fla. 280, 52 So. 193; Grainger v. Fuller, 72 Fla. 57, 72 So. 462; Warner v. Ware, 136 Fla. 466, 182 So. 605; Toll v. Waters, 138 Fla. 349, 189 So. 393; 25 C.J.S., Damages, § 65, pp. 552, 553, and......
-
Morey v. State
...advisable, however, to say that such an irregularity should under no circumstances be permitted. The legality of a conviction under such [72 Fla. 57] circumstances is very doubtful. During the [72 So. 494] whole of the trial of a capital case the defendant is required to be present, and it ......
-
Toll v. Waters
...in that connection, for damages to be sustained in the future, should be reduced to its present value. In the case of Grainger v. Fuller, 72 Fla. 57, 72 So. 462, 463, this Court, speaking through Mr. Justice Whitfield, said: 'At the trial the following charges were given and exceptions were......
-
Baggett v. Davis
...in the future; and not merely that it will apparently affect the health and earning capacity of the injured party. See Grainger v. Fuller, 72 Fla. 57, 72 So. 462; 13 Cyc. 239; White v. Milwaukee City Ry. Co., 61 Wis. 536, 21 N.W. 524, 50 Am.Rep. 154; Louisville Southern Railroad Co. v. Mino......
-
Ake v. Birnbaum
...it. See Smith v. Bagwell, 19 Fla. 117, 45 Am.Rep. 12; Harby v. Florida East Coast Hotel Co., 59 Fla. 280, 52 So. 193; Grainger v. Fuller, 72 Fla. 57, 72 So. 462; Warner v. Ware, 136 Fla. 466, 182 So. 605; Toll v. Waters, 138 Fla. 349, 189 So. 393; 25 C.J.S., Damages, § 65, pp. 552, 553, and......
-
Morey v. State
...advisable, however, to say that such an irregularity should under no circumstances be permitted. The legality of a conviction under such [72 Fla. 57] circumstances is very doubtful. During the [72 So. 494] whole of the trial of a capital case the defendant is required to be present, and it ......
-
Toll v. Waters
...in that connection, for damages to be sustained in the future, should be reduced to its present value. In the case of Grainger v. Fuller, 72 Fla. 57, 72 So. 462, 463, this Court, speaking through Mr. Justice Whitfield, said: 'At the trial the following charges were given and exceptions were......
-
Baggett v. Davis
...in the future; and not merely that it will apparently affect the health and earning capacity of the injured party. See Grainger v. Fuller, 72 Fla. 57, 72 So. 462; 13 Cyc. 239; White v. Milwaukee City Ry. Co., 61 Wis. 536, 21 N.W. 524, 50 Am.Rep. 154; Louisville Southern Railroad Co. v. Mino......