Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. Good

Citations

• 79 Fla. 589
• 84 So. 733

Syllabus

<p>1. In actions wliere negligence is the basis of recovery it is not necessary for the declaration to set out the facts constituting the negligence, but an allegation of sufficient acts causing injury, coupled with an averment that they were negligently done will be sufficient.</p> <p>2. Contributory negligence in an action of tort is a defense which should be pleaded by the defendant and proved by him unless it appears from the allegations and proof of plaintiff, and it is not necessary for plaintiff to negative by his declaration the existence of contributory negligence.</p> <p>3. Where the trial court concurs in the verdict of a jury by denying a motion for a new trial and there is evidence to support the verdict, an appellate court should not disturb it in the absence of a showing that the jurors were influenced by considerations outside the evidence.</p> <p>4. Where the evidence does not show that negligence and carelessness upon the part of deceased at a railroad crossing were the sole proximate cause of his death or that the defendant railroad company was free from fault, a verdict awarding damages should not be disturbed where the award was not patently unreasonable in view of the gtatute allowing a recovery in case of concurring negligence and an apportionment of damages.</p>