History
  • No items yet
midpage
Clark v. Gray
143 So. 2d 504
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1962
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See: Crosby v. Stubblebine, Fla.App.1962, 142 So.2d 358.

PEARSON, TILLMAN, C. J., dissents.





Dissenting Opinion

PEARSON, TILLMAN, Chief Judge

(dissenting).

It is my view that this judgment should: be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial because of an erroneous instruction. The instruction was, I think, contrary to the law of this State as set forth in Carraway v. Revell, Fla.1959, 116 So.2d 16, 22.

The faulty instruction was objected to at charge conference, and the record reveals that it was upon a vital issue. It was therefore prejudicial. Once it appears-from the record that the issue is vital, it ought not to be incumbent on a party to include unnecessary matter in the record. T would think it most unfortunate if the opinion cited by the majority were interpreted to require unnecessary matter in a record.

Case Details

Case Name: Clark v. Gray
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Jul 17, 1962
Citation: 143 So. 2d 504
Docket Number: No. 61-530
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.