History
  • No items yet
midpage
Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Jones
66 Fla. 51
Fla.
1913
Check Treatment
Cockrell, J.

To a judgment against it in the sum of 1829.09, as damages as also for attorney’s fees and costs, the railroad company prosecutes this writ of error.

The transcript is clumsily prepared, but we have enough before us to show error.

The charges given by the court are so inconsistent as necessarily to confuse the jury. In one breath the jury *52is instructed that it may assess the damages for the full amount claimed in the declaration and in the next breath that the damages must not exceed the contract price for the stock lost as agreed upon in the bill of lading. The assessment made by the jury shows that the contract price was ignored.

An examination of the bill of exceptions does not cure this error, and we can but reverse the judgment based upon this verdict.

Judgment reversed.

Shackleford, C. J., and Taylor, Hockior and Whitfield, J. J., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Jones
Court Name: Supreme Court of Florida
Date Published: Jun 25, 1913
Citation: 66 Fla. 51
Court Abbreviation: Fla.
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.