Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 768.043 (2025)

Remittitur and additur actions arising out of operation of motor vehicles.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

768.043 Remittitur and additur actions arising out of operation of motor vehicles.—

(1) In any action for the recovery of damages based on personal injury or wrongful death arising out of the operation of a motor vehicle, whether in tort or in contract, wherein the trier of fact determines that liability exists on the part of the defendant and a verdict is rendered which awards money damages to the plaintiff, it shall be the responsibility of the court, upon proper motion, to review the amount of such award to determine if such amount is clearly excessive or inadequate in light of the facts and circumstances which were presented to the trier of fact. If the court finds that the amount awarded is clearly excessive or inadequate, it shall order a remittitur or additur, as the case may be. If the party adversely affected by such remittitur or additur does not agree, the court shall order a new trial in the cause on the issue of damages only.

(2) In determining whether an award is clearly excessive or inadequate in light of the facts and circumstances presented to the trier of fact and in determining the amount, if any, that such award exceeds a reasonable range of damages or is inadequate, the court shall consider the following criteria:

(a) Whether the amount awarded is indicative of prejudice, passion, or corruption on the part of the trier of fact.

(b) Whether it clearly appears that the trier of fact ignored the evidence in reaching the verdict or misconceived the merits of the case relating to the amounts of damages recoverable.

(c) Whether the trier of fact took improper elements of damages into account or arrived at the amount of damages by speculation or conjecture.

(d) Whether the amount awarded bears a reasonable relation to the amount of damages proved and the injury suffered.

(e) Whether the amount awarded is supported by the evidence and is such that it could be adduced in a logical manner by reasonable persons.

(3) It is the intent of the Legislature to vest the trial courts of this state with the discretionary authority to review the amounts of damages awarded by a trier of fact, in light of a standard of excessiveness or inadequacy. The Legislature recognizes that the reasonable actions of a jury are a fundamental precept of American jurisprudence and that such actions should be disturbed or modified only with caution and discretion. However, it is further recognized that a review by the courts in accordance with the standards set forth in this section provides an additional element of soundness and logic to our judicial system and is in the best interests of the citizens of Florida.

History.—s. 41, ch. 77-468; s. 283, ch. 79-400.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 68 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Adams v. Wright, 403 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1981).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Adams v. Wright, 403 So. 2d 391 (Fla. 1981). · cites it 20× “This is a direct appeal from the Circuit Court of Volusia County which held that section 768.043, Florida Statutes (1977) [1] *393 concerning remittitur and additur actions arising out of the operation of motor vehicles, is constitutional.”

ITT Hartford Ins. Co. of the SE v. Owens, 816 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 2002). · cites it 13× “" After conducting a hearing on the matter, in which the respondents agreed to use the petitioner's discount rate, the trial court entered a supplemental order granting additur in the sum of 9,214, plus interest from the date of the jury's verdict.”

Truelove v. Blount, 954 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). · cites it 10× “The appellants filed a motion for remittitur pursuant to section 768.043, Florida Statutes (2003), asking the trial court "for a remittitur of the award for future medical expenses and future lost earnings to zero and to remit the award for cost of repair to the [l]oader to zero.”

Progressive Select Ins. Co. v. Lorenzo, 49 So. 3d 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). · cites it 16× “043, Florida Statutes, requires a trial court to review a jury's award of damages in personal injury actions arising out of automobile accidents: In any action for the recovery of damages based on personal injury or wrongful death arising out of the operation of a motor vehicle,…”

Ellender v. Bricker, 967 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). · cites it 8× “Ellender filed a motion for additur or, in the alternative, for new trial on damages pursuant to section 768.043, Florida Statutes (2003).”

Waste Mgmt., Inc. v. Mora, 940 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 2006). · cites it 6× “Shortly after the adoption of section 768.043, we decided Adams v. Wright, 403 So.”

Rasinski v. McCoy, 227 So. 3d 201 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). · cites it 5× “See § 768.043(1), Fla. Stat.; Truelove v. Blount, 954 So.”

Beauvais v. Edell, 760 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). · cites it 6× “Section 768.043, Florida Statutes (1993), is the controlling and applicable statute authorizing the trial court to order, as an alternative to a new trial, an additur to a jury award upon finding the amount of damages awarded by the jury is clearly inadequate [followed by text…”

Brant v. Dollar Rent a Car Sys., Inc., 869 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). · cites it 7× “As the court explained: "the Third District's determination that section 768.043 does not require a defendant to be given the option of a new trial when an additur is granted is contrary to the express language of the statute and analogous precedent concerning remittiturs.”

Moore v. Perry, 944 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). · cites it 6× “Perry filed a motion for additur pursuant to section 768.043, Florida Statutes (2005), pointing out that although she incurred ,166.”

Philon v. Reid, 602 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). · cites it 6× “" Because the trial judge neither stated reasons for finding the verdict "clearly excessive," nor did he first order a remittitur pursuant to the mandate of section 768.043(1), Florida Statutes (1989), we reverse and remand with instructions.”

DeLong v. Wickes Co., 545 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). · cites it 6× “See § 768.043, Fla. Stat. (1987); Adams, 403 So.”

Show all 68 citing cases →

— 768.043(1) — 30 cases

Rasinski v. McCoy, 227 So. 3d 201 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017). “See § 768.043(1), Fla. Stat.; Truelove v. Blount, 954 So.”

Brant v. Dollar Rent a Car Sys., Inc., 869 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). “As the court explained: "the Third District's determination that section 768.043 does not require a defendant to be given the option of a new trial when an additur is granted is contrary to the express language of the statute and analogous precedent concerning remittiturs.”

Waste Mgmt., Inc. v. Mora, 940 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 2006). “Shortly after the adoption of section 768.043, we decided Adams v. Wright, 403 So.”

Progressive Select Ins. Co. v. Lorenzo, 49 So. 3d 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). “043, Florida Statutes, requires a trial court to review a jury's award of damages in personal injury actions arising out of automobile accidents: In any action for the recovery of damages based on personal injury or wrongful death arising out of the operation of a motor vehicle,…”

Philon v. Reid, 602 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). “" Because the trial judge neither stated reasons for finding the verdict "clearly excessive," nor did he first order a remittitur pursuant to the mandate of section 768.043(1), Florida Statutes (1989), we reverse and remand with instructions.”

— 768.043(2) — 13 cases

Festival Fun Parks, LLC v. Bellamy, 123 So. 3d 684 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013).

Vickers v. Thomas, 237 So. 3d 412 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017).

Ashley N. Pogue v. Jennifer Garib, 254 So. 3d 503 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018).

— 768.043(2)(a) — 6 cases

Truelove v. Blount, 954 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). “The appellants filed a motion for remittitur pursuant to section 768.043, Florida Statutes (2003), asking the trial court "for a remittitur of the award for future medical expenses and future lost earnings to zero and to remit the award for cost of repair to the [l]oader to zero.”

Airstar, Inc. v. Gubbins, 668 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

Antonio Ferrer v. Ana La Serna, 179 So. 3d 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015).

Pugliese v. Terek, 117 So. 3d 1230 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013).

Clemente Arias v. Mary Anna Porter (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).

— 768.043(2)(b) — 3 cases

Ellender v. Bricker, 967 So. 2d 1088 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). “Ellender filed a motion for additur or, in the alternative, for new trial on damages pursuant to section 768.043, Florida Statutes (2003).”

Clemente Arias v. Mary Anna Porter (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).

Bassett v. Morine (Fla. 2d DCA 2026).

— 768.043(2)(c) — 3 cases

Geico Indem. Co. v. DeGrandchamp, 102 So. 3d 685 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012).

Bassett v. Morine (Fla. 2d DCA 2026).

— 768.043(2)(d) — 4 cases

Geico Indem. Co. v. DeGrandchamp, 102 So. 3d 685 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012).

Bassett v. Morine (Fla. 2d DCA 2026).

— 768.043(2)(e) — 8 cases

Montesinos v. Zapata, 43 So. 3d 97 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010).

Salazar v. Santos (Harry) & Co., Inc., 537 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

Aircraft Serv. Int'l, Inc. v. Jackson, 768 So. 2d 1094 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).

— 768.043(3) — 2 cases

Bassett v. Morine (Fla. 2d DCA 2026).

Clemente Arias v. Mary Anna Porter (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.