Upson v. Hazelrig, 83-2360
Decision Date | 07 February 1984 |
Docket Number | No. 83-2360,83-2360 |
Parties | Josie Mae UPSON, Appellant, v. James L. HAZELRIG, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Jeanne Heyward, Goodhart, Rosner & Greene, Miami, for appellant.
Ellis Rubin, Naples, and Alan S. Marshall, St. Petersburg, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.
The final judgment denying the defendant-appellant's motion to tax costs is affirmed. Where, as here, the jury finds that the automobile accident was caused solely by the defendant's negligence, but awards the plaintiff no damages for the claimed injuries to his person and property, the plaintiff is nevertheless the sole party entitled to recover judgment and thus costs under Section 57.041, Florida Statutes (1983), Raffel v. Magarian, 165 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). A fortiori, where, as here, the trial court entered an unappealed judgment notwithstanding the verdict for the plaintiff in the undisputed amount of the property damage to the plaintiff's automobile, the plaintiff is the "party recovering judgment" entitled to costs under the statute. See Hendry Tractor Company v. Fernandez, 432 So.2d 1315 (Fla.1983) ( ); Kendall East Estates, Inc. v. Banks, 386 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) ( ). If, as the record below reflects, the defendant's negligence and the plaintiff's property damage were not issues of serious dispute, and the defendant's primary defense was that the plaintiff had not suffered a permanent injury within reasonable medical probability so as to entitle the plaintiff to recover for personal injuries, see § 627.737, Fla.Stat. (1981), then, given the results of this case, the defendant could have preserved his claim for costs had he made an offer of judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442 in the undisputed amount of the property damage. That not having been done and the defendant not being a "party recovering judgment," the defendant's motion to tax costs was correctly denied.
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sunshine Bottling Co. v. Tropicana Products, Inc.
...its costs. See The Green Companies, Inc. v. Kendall Racquetball Investment, Ltd., 658 So.2d 1119 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Upson v. Hazelrig, 444 So.2d 1127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Blue v. Williams, 200 So.2d 626 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967); Raffel v. Magarian, 165 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA However, we find Suns......
-
Tacher v. Mathews, 3D01-3369.
...before a three judge panel, we sua sponte reheard the case en banc to consider the intra-district conflict between Upson v. Hazelrig, 444 So.2d 1127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), Blue v. Williams, 200 So.2d 626 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967), and Raffel v. Magarian, 165 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964), all of which......
-
C.U. Associates, Inc. v. R.B. Grove, Inc.
...the defendant not being a 'party recovering judgment,' the defendant's motion to tax costs was correctly denied." Upson v. Hazelrig, 444 So.2d 1127, 1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Thus, if the appellant herein wanted to prevent or mitigate the assessment of fees and costs against it or itself wan......
-
Militana v. Ladd, 91-2227
...parties recovering judgment." Weeks, 566 So.2d at 345. See also Chivers v. Smith, 556 So.2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Upson v. Hazelrig, 444 So.2d 1127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Sec. 57.041, Fla.Stat. Accordingly, the final cost judgment entered in favor of the defendants' liability insurance carr......