Shoup v. Waits
| Decision Date | 01 March 1926 |
| Citation | 107 So. 769,91 Fla. 378 |
| Parties | SHOUP v. WAITS et al. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Alachua County; A. V. Long, Judge.
Assumpsit by W. H. Waits and another against O. G. Shoup. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant brings error.
Reversed and remanded, with direction.
Syllabus by the Court
In assumpsit on open account, where verdict for plaintiff in stated sum does not refer to interest, interest on such sum from due date of date of verdict cannot be added in entering judgment thereon. In an action in assumpsit upon an open account, wherein a verdict is rendered for the plaintiff in stated sum, but there is no reference to interest in the verdict, there is no authority, in entering up the judgment on that verdict, to add to the sum assessed by the jury as damages an additional sum for interest thereon from the due date to the date of the verdict.
Judgment erroneously including interest on amount of verdict not referring to interest will be reversed and cause remanded for entry of judgment. for such amount (Rev. Gen. St. 1920, § 2918). Under Rev. Gen. St. 1920, § 2918, judgment including interest on amount of verdict for plaintiff in assumpsit on open account will be reversed and cause remanded, with direction to enter judgment for amount found by jury, where verdict did not refer to interest.
COUNSEL Hampton & Hampton, of Gainesville, for plaintiff in error.
E. G Baxter and S. L. Scruggs, both of Gainesville, for defendants in error.
Defendants in error, as plaintiffs below, sued the plaintiff in error to recover a balance due upon the value of certain lumber sold by the former to the latter on open account. The declaration was upon the common counts. Plaintiffs below recovered judgment for $576.27. To that judgment writ of error was taken.
Numerous errors are assigned upon the rulings of the trial court upon the pleadings, the admission of certain evidence and the rejection of other evidence at the trial, the giving of certain charges by the trial court and the refusal to give other charges, and the denial of the motion of the defendant below for a new trial. We have examined these assignments, and find that none of them present reversible error. Although the plaintiffs' proof of delivery of the lumber was meager, as was also their proof of an account stated, it was not so deficient as to authorize a directed verdict for the defendant, and was therefore properly submitted to the jury. See Standard Oil Co. v. Van Etten, 1 S.Ct. 178, 107 U.S. 325, 27 L.Ed. 319; Glass v. Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co., 74 So. 981 73 Fla. 873.
Plaintiff in error, however, further assigns as error the action of the trial court 'in entering up judgment in excess of verdict.' The verdict is:
'We, the jury, find for the plaintiffs and assess their damages at $542.62.'
There is no specific mention of interest. Judgment was entered as follows:
'It is thereupon considered, ordered, and adjudged that the plaintiffs, W. H. Waits and Y. A. Harris, do have and recover of and from the defendant, O. G. Shoup, the sum of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Plantation Key Developers, Inc. v. Colonial Mortg. Co. of Indiana, Inc.
...767 (5th Cir. 1948). Under Florida law, a party may recover pre-judgment interest on damages for breach of contract. Shoup v. Waits, 91 Fla. 378, 107 So. 769 (1926); Vacation Prizes, Inc. v. City National Bank of Miami Beach, 227 So.2d 352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). However, the Florida Supreme Co......
-
Underwriters at LaConcorde v. Airtech Services, Inc., 84-230
...of damages, and the jury fails to award interest, the trial judge is not authorized to include interest in the judgment. Shoup v. Waits, 91 Fla. 378, 107 So. 769 (1926); Commodore Plaza at Century 21 Condominium Association v. Cohen, 350 So.2d 502 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), appeal dismissed, cert.......
-
W.T. Rawleigh Co. v. Hannon
... ... 448, 172 N.E. 590, 72 ... A.L.R. 1143; Minot v. City of Boston, 201 Mass. 10, ... 86 N.E. 783, 25 L.R.A.,N.S., 311; Shoup v. Waits et ... al., 91 Fla. 378, 107 So. 769; Cary & Co. v. Hyer, ... 91 Fla. 322, 107 So. 684; Isbell-Porter Co. v ... Braker, 120 A.D. 384, ... ...
-
Law v. Blue Lagoon-Pompano, Inc.
...interest and had sought a jury instruction thereon, albeit from the incorrect commencement date. Two early cases, Shoup v. Waits, 91 Fla. 378, 379, 107 So. 769, 770 (1926), and State ex rel. Boulevard Mortgage Company v. Thompson, 113 Fla. 419, 151 So. 704 (1933), both hold that the award o......