HomeMy WebLinkAbout0128 463580
IN THE CIRCUIT COUR'P OF THE
JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AMID FOR ST. II]CIE
OOUNI'Y, FIARIDA
CASE NO. 79-106 CA
JOE STEVF1d DO?PSON and
R~ATHRYN RAY,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
. ST. IIICIE CXXJN'1'Y- FORT
PIED FIRE DISTRICT, ®ORGE
IIJIS II~ID, and AE`I't~i CAS[k1L'TY & SURETY OOr~ANY,
Defendants.
F1NAL JUDQ~
THIS CAUSE having Dome on to be heard with the benefit of
Jury on the 20th day of August, 1979 and continuing through the 2Lst day of
August, 1979, and it appearing to the Court that a jury was duly impaneled
and sworn in accordance with the law, and after reviewing .the various dociam~ts
introduced into evidence, and after hearing testimony of the Plaintiffs and
their individual witnesses, and the testimony of the Defendants, and their
individual witnesses, and the argement of cotu~sel, and the charge of the
Court, the jury retired to consider their verdict and ton returning it to
open Court, ordered the following verdict:
JURY VERDICT
"We, the jury, find as follows:
(1) Was there negligence on the part of the Defendants, ST. LUCIE C~OUNI'Y-
FORT PIERCE FIRE DISTRICT and GE70RGE LUIS IIdGGIA~ID, which was a legal cause
of damage to the Plaintiff? Yes.
(2) Was there negligence on the part of the Plaintiff, JOE S'I~'VII~I DO?I50N,
which was a legal cause of his damage? Yes. _ `
(3) State the percentage of any negligence which was a legal cause of {
i
damage to the Plaintiffs, JOE SI~~N DO?I'SDiJ and KATHRYN RAY, that you
F
charge to: '
_ Plaintiff, JOE S'1~'VII~i DOR'SON 70$
Defendant, C~70RGE LUIS II~IGGIAI~ID, and
ST. IIJCIE COUNTY - FT. PIEFaCE
FIRE DISTRICT 30$
f
uU~!A PAGf