Greer v. ThweattGreer v. Thweatt
Thе plaintiff in an automobile collision case has appealed from a judgment for thе defendant entered by the Escambia County Court of Record, notwithstanding a jury verdict for the plaintiff.
Whether that judgment was properly entered by the court pursuant to the rules governing the entry оf a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, is the question presented for our determination in this appeal.
The jury at the trial, under the pleadings, evidence, and jury instructions, by returning a verdict for the plaintiff necessarily found that he was not guilty of contributory negligence. The trial court in entering the judgment for the defendant notwithstanding the verdict, expressly found that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence. This situation presents a classic case calling for a clear delineation of the distinction between the functions of the jury and the court in the determination of factual issuеs at a jury trial.
In the recent case of Love v. Adams,
“Motions for judgment notwithstanding verdict, like motions for directed verdict, should be resolvеd with extreme caution since the granting thereof holds that one side of the case is essеntially devoid of probative evidence. Cf. Ely v. Atlantic Coast Line R. R. Co., Fla.App. 1962,138 So.2d 521 , 524 and cases there cited. The movant admits all material facts as attested by his adversary and also admits all inferences of fact favorable to the adversary that reasonably might be drawn frоm the evidence as a whole. Cash v. Gates, Fla.App. 1963,151 So.2d 838 , 840. If there is room for difference among reasonable men as to the existence of a material fact sought to be established, or as to a material inference which reasonably might be drawn from established facts, the case should be submitted to the jury. E. g. Budgen v. Brady, Fla.App.1958,103 So.2d 672 , 674. On the instant record we cannot agree that a jury could not, as a matter of law, reach a valid verdict for the plaintiff. Accordingly that portion of the order granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict is reversed.”
In addition to the just-quоted rules, another rule applicable in the present consideration is that, in actiоns at law like the present one, the issues of negligence and contributory negligence should be submitted to the jury for determination and ordinarily should not be disposed of by the court in a summary manner, as through the entry of a judgment notwithstanding the verdict. This rule was summarized by the District Court of Appeаl, Second Dis
“The general rule, of course, is that issues of negligence or contributory negligеnce are to be determined by the jury and ordinarily should not be disposed of by the Court in a pеremptory manner. Where the facts are such that reasonable persons may fairly arrive at different conclusions, the question of negligence or contributory negligence shоuld be submitted to a jury. 23 Florida Jurisprudence, Negligence, 129, and cases therein cited. Numerous оther additional authorities may, of course, be cited but the rule is so well established that it is deemed unnecessary.”
In Drahota v. Taylor Construction Co.,
A final rule applicable here is that recognized by your Supreme Court in Bess v. 17545 Collins Ave., Inc.,
“Wе feel this to be a case extremely close on the question of negligence and сontributory negligence and in such cases the doubt thereon should always be resolved in favor of a jury trial. * * *”
Applying the foregoing rules to the evidence adduced at the trial, we reach the conclusion that, while reasonable men could conclude from that evidence that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, it is also true that reasonable men сould conclude from the said evidence that the plaintiff was not thus guilty, so there was room for difference among reasonable men as to the existence of the material fаct of the plaintiff’s contributory negligence. On the record before us, therefore, we сannot agree that a jury could not, as a matter of law, reach a valid verdict for thе plaintiff, and hence the judgment for the defendant notwithstanding the verdict was improvi-dentially entеred.
For the foregoing reasons, the judgment notwithstanding the verdict must be, and it is, reversed and the cause is remanded with instructions to enter a final judgment for the plaintiff in accordance with the verdict of the jury.
Reversed and remanded with instructions.