Arias v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Arias v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

528 So. 2d 25, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1321, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2236, 1988 WL 53043

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 31, 1988·No. Nos. 86-3174, 86-3175·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Rejecting the appellant’s contentions, we find first that evidence that the plaintiffs driver was acting in a sudden emergency supports the jury’s conclusion that she did not negligently operate her vehicle, so that the plaintiff was not entitled to a directed verdict on liability. 4 Fla.Jur.2d Automobiles and Other Vehicles § 233 (1978). Second, the allegedly improper final argument of counsel did not justify either the declaration of a mistrial below or the award of a new trial here. Gonzalez v. State, 511 So.2d 703 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Rejecting the appellant’s contentions, we find first that evidence that the plaintiffs driver was acting in a sudden emergency supports the jury’s conclusion that she did not negligently operate her vehicle, so that the plaintiff was not entitled to a directed verdict on liability. 4 Fla.Jur.2d Automobiles and Other Vehicles § 233 (1978). Second, the allegedly improper final argument of counsel did not justify either the declaration of a mistrial below or the award of a new trial here. Gonzalez v. State, 511 So.2d 703 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Affirmed.

Arias v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 528 So. 2d 25, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1321, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2236, 1988 WL 53043 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

528 So. 2d 25 (Arias v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related