Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car System of Fla., Inc., No. 61-726

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Writing for the CourtBefore PEARSON, TILLMAN; HENDRY; CARROLL
Citation141 So.2d 609
PartiesOLIN'S, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. AVIS RENTAL CAR SYSTEM OF FLORIDA, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.
Decision Date22 May 1962
Docket NumberNo. 61-726

Page 609

141 So.2d 609
OLIN'S, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant,
v.
AVIS RENTAL CAR SYSTEM OF FLORIDA, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.
No. 61-726.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
May 22, 1962.

Achor & Achor, Miami, for appellant.

Walton, Lantaff, Schroeder, Atkins, Carson & Wahel, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, TILLMAN, C. J., and CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

HENDRY, Judge.

This is the latest in a long series of appeals involving the parties herein and the subject matter of this litigation.

We, therefore, deem it unnecessary to go into a detailed discussion of the facts of the case as they are fully reported in the previous appeals. 1

Briefly stated this case commenced in October, 1957, when Avis Rental Car System

Page 610

of Florida, Inc., (hereafter Avis) filed a complaint against Olin's, Inc., (hereafter Olin's) seeking a declaratory decree adjudicating the rights of the parties under a written contract. The plaintiff alleged in its complaint that it was in doubt as to its rights, status and other equitable or legal relations with the defendant under the terms and provisions of said contract. The particular provisions being referred to are as follows:

'4. Olin's agrees not to solicit a contract with said airport, county commission or anyone in authority in connection with said airport contract, directly or indirectly, either at this time, or at any time during the life of Avis' contract and any extension thereof during the life of this contract, except if said airport contract should be terminated any time through the fault or through circumstances beyond the control of either party hereto.'

'6. In the even Licensee shall violate any of the terms, covenants, conditions or provisions hereof, Licensor may at its option terminate this Agreement by giving to Licensee, at least ten (10) days prior to such termination date written notice of its intention to terminate this Agreement, specifying therein the date on which such termination shall become effective.'

The case went to trial with a jury on plaintiff's second amended complaint and the defendant's answer. The issues raised by the pleadings were whether Olin's had breached its agreement with Avis and, if so, the amount of damages Avis was entitled to recover. The trial consumed almost two days during which time witnesses testified on behalf of the plaintiff and the defendant and numerous exhibits were introduced in evidence. After all of the evidence was in and the parties had rested the plaintiff moved the court for a directed verdict. The motion was granted as to liability but given to the jury on the question of damages. The question of damages was submitted to the jury by the court without any instructions from the court. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff in the amount of $125,596.18. A partial final decree followed the verdict. It is from the partial final decree that this interlocutory appeal is taken. 2

The appellant, Olin's, urges several grounds for reversal. The first one we shall consider is the propriety of the trial judge's action in directing a verdict as to liability for the plaintiff. Appellant contends that the trial judge was in error in directing the verdict because he failed to consider all of the facts adduced by the defendant's witnesses as either (1) true, or (2) in the light most favorable to the defendant, or (3) resolved conflicting facts in favor of the defendant.

We have reviewed the testimony of all the witnesses together with the exhibits admitted in evidence. From such study we are convinced that the appellant's position has merit and therefore the trial judge should not have directed such verdict. The Supreme Court of Florida, in Hilkmeyer v. Latin American Air Cargo Expediters, Fla.1957, 94 So.2d 821, stated at page 824:

'This Court's views have recently been recorded:

'Power to direct a verdict should be cautiously exercised and the same should never be granted unless the evidence is such that under no view which the jury might lawfully take of the evidence favorable to the adverse party

Page 611

could a verdict for the adverse party be sustained. * * * A party moving for a directed verdict admits not only facts shown by the evidence, but also reasonable inference favorable to the adverse party that the jury might fairly and reasonably arrive at from the evidence, and if the evidence is conflicting, or evidence tending to prove the issues, the case should be submitted to the jury as a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 practice notes
  • Bucacci v. Boutin, No. 3D04-2299.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 14 Junio 2006
    ...and that a written instrument which is intelligible on its face must control . . . ." Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car Sys. of Fla., Inc., 141 So.2d 609, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962) (emphasis added). Finally, we note that if an issue of contract interpretation concerns the intent of the parties a......
  • Easton-Babcock & Associates, Inc. v. Fernandez, EASTON-BABCOCK
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 18 Febrero 1998
    ...Inc., 94 So.2d 821, 824 (Fla.1957); Bryan v. Loftin, 51 So.2d 724, 725 (Fla.1951); Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car Sys. of Florida, Inc., 141 So.2d 609, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962); Marsa v. Lopez, 400 So.2d 563, 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Based upon these standards, we conclude that the lower cour......
  • Allen v. Carlotti, No. 75-3233
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • 25 Mayo 1977
    ...Company of America v. Butler, 177 So.2d 712 (3rd Dist.Ct. Fla.App. 1965); Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car Systems of Florida, Inc., 141 So.2d 609 (3rd Dist.Ct. Fla.App.1962); Neff v. World Publishing Co., 349 F.2d 235 (8th Cir. The record reveals the following undisputed facts which the dis......
  • Matter of Sapse, Bankruptcy No. 83-00531-BKC-SMW
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Eleventh Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Southern District of Florida
    • 26 Julio 1983
    ...Canteen Company of America v. Butler, 177 So.2d 712 (3rd DCA Fla.1965); Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car System of Florida, Inc., 141 So.2d 609 (3rd DCA Fla.1962). This judicial prerogative has been recognized by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Allen v. Carlotti, 55......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • Bucacci v. Boutin, No. 3D04-2299.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 14 Junio 2006
    ...and that a written instrument which is intelligible on its face must control . . . ." Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car Sys. of Fla., Inc., 141 So.2d 609, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962) (emphasis added). Finally, we note that if an issue of contract interpretation concerns the intent of the parties a......
  • Easton-Babcock & Associates, Inc. v. Fernandez, EASTON-BABCOCK
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 18 Febrero 1998
    ...Inc., 94 So.2d 821, 824 (Fla.1957); Bryan v. Loftin, 51 So.2d 724, 725 (Fla.1951); Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car Sys. of Florida, Inc., 141 So.2d 609, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962); Marsa v. Lopez, 400 So.2d 563, 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Based upon these standards, we conclude that the lower cour......
  • Allen v. Carlotti, No. 75-3233
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit)
    • 25 Mayo 1977
    ...Company of America v. Butler, 177 So.2d 712 (3rd Dist.Ct. Fla.App. 1965); Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car Systems of Florida, Inc., 141 So.2d 609 (3rd Dist.Ct. Fla.App.1962); Neff v. World Publishing Co., 349 F.2d 235 (8th Cir. The record reveals the following undisputed facts which the dis......
  • Matter of Sapse, Bankruptcy No. 83-00531-BKC-SMW
    • United States
    • United States Bankruptcy Courts. Eleventh Circuit. U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Southern District of Florida
    • 26 Julio 1983
    ...Canteen Company of America v. Butler, 177 So.2d 712 (3rd DCA Fla.1965); Olin's, Inc. v. Avis Rental Car System of Florida, Inc., 141 So.2d 609 (3rd DCA Fla.1962). This judicial prerogative has been recognized by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Allen v. Carlotti, 55......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT