Petroleum Carrier Corp. v. Gates
| Citation | 330 So.2d 751 |
| Decision Date | 05 March 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. Y--496,Y--496 |
| Parties | PETROLEUM CARRIER CORPORATION et al., Appellants, v. Philip D. GATES and Mary B. Gates, Appellees. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Robert P. Gaines, Beggs, Lane, Daniel, Gaines & Davis, Pensacola, for appellants.
Richard P. Warfield, Levin, Warfield, Middlebrooks, Graff, Mabie, Rosenbloum & Magie, Pensacola, for appellees.
Appellants, defendants in the trial court, appeal from a final judgment based on a jury verdict awarding appellees damages in the approximate amount of $31,000. Appellants request a new trial, arguing that the award of damages was excessive and that the trial court erred in directing a verdict on the issue of liability.
Appellees, Mr. and Mrs. Gates, initiated this action by filing their complaint for damages which was based on an accident between an automobile driven by Mrs. Gates and a tractor-tank trailer vehicle owned by appellant Petroleum Carrier Corporation. According to Mrs. Gates, three tractor-tank trucks were proceeding in a westerly direction on Highway 98 in the right lane while she was driving her Mercedes in the left lane. She noticed the lead tank truck moving from the right lane The drivers of the three tank trucks view the accident somewhat differently. The driver of the lead truck stated that he did not see the collision because he was too far ahead (west) on Highway 98. The driver of the second tank truck testified that he was in the right lane, saw the obstruction ahead, slowed down to allow a car to pass him in the left lane, and finally moved into the left lane. He testified that he did not see the accident. The driver of the third tank truck, Steven C. Foster, stated that he saw the obstruction shortly before the driver of the second truck put on his left turn signal light. Mr. Foster turned on his own left turn signal and looked into his rear view mirror where he viewed Mrs. Gates' Mercedes move from behind him into the left lane to pass. When the Mercedes passed his truck, Mr. Foster steered his truck into the left lane. He testified that when he noticed the brake lights on the Mercedes, he began applying his brakes. Foster's truck rapidly overtook the Mercedes, and it appeared to him that the Mercedes had come to an almost complete stop, although he admitted on cross-examination that he could not tell whether the car was still moving or not. He testified that he was unable to stop his truck before striking the rear of Mrs. Gates' automobile.
to the left lane in order to avoid an obstruction in the right lane. When she was about a block away from the obstruction, she claims that she slowed down, not by putting on her brake, but by easing off on the accelerator as the lead tank truck moved from the right to the left lane. As she slowed down, she was struck in the rear by the second of the three tank trucks.
It is axiomatic that a directed verdict should be entered only where the state of the evidence is such that a jury of reasonable men could not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ligman v. Tardiff, 84-127
...of a material fact or material inference, and that the movant is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Petroleum Carrier Corp. v. Gates, 330 So.2d 751 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Kilburn v. Davenport, 286 So.2d at 243; Cunningham v. Romano, 278 So.2d 631 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 285 So.2d......
-
Gilpin v. Langan
...the negligence of both parties is at issue. We do, however, believe that such cases will be extremely rare." Petroleum Carrier Corp. v. Gates, 330 So.2d 751, 752 (Fla.App.1976). The Superior Court conceded that "a case may arise in which it may be proper to hold as a matter of law the plain......
-
Pittman v. Volusia County
...court erred in directing a verdict. See Hernandez v. Motrico, Inc., 370 So.2d 836, 837 (Fla.3d DCA 1979); Petroleum Carrier Corp. v. Gates, 330 So.2d 751, 752 (Fla.1st DCA 1976); Budgen v. Brady, 103 So.2d 672, 674 (Fla.1st DCA 1958) cert. denied, 105 So.2d 793 Accordingly, the judgment for......
-
Resser v. Boise-Cascade Corp.
...the contributory negligence rule), particularly in cases where the plaintiff's own negligence is in issue." Petroleum Carrier Corporation v. Gates, 330 So.2d 751, 752 (Fla.App.1976).5 After the date of the accident, but prior to the date of trial, ORS 483.104 was repealed by the legislature......