¶1Appellant argues that a $3,000 jury verdict was grossly inadequate, and that the trial court therefore erred in denying her motion for a new trial. We agree, because, although some of her injuries alleged to have resulted from this accident may have existed before the accident, even defendant’s physician admitted that plaintiff had a permanent disability as a result of an ankle injury caused by this accident, and the surgical expenses for the ankle alone exceeded the verdict. See Shelly v. Hartford Casualty Ins. Co., 445 So.2d 415 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). We therefore reverse and remand for a new trial on damages.
654 So. 2d 1299
Smith v. Kaufman
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided May 31, 1995
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1995-05-31
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently December 2010
2 state decisions
Relies on 445 So. 2d 415 - Skelly v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1995-05-31
View the full empirical analysis of this case →