Barabas v. Rojas

481 So. 2d 1003, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6045
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 29, 1986·No. No. 84-857·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We hold, under the facts of this case, that it was reversible error for the trial court to refuse to give the jury the charge on concurrent causes as found in Standard Jury Instruction 5.1(b). Tilley v. Broward Hospital District, 458 So.2d 817 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Higgins v. Johnson, 434 So.2d 976 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) and Goodman v. Becker, 430 So.2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). [1004]*1004The remaining appellate points are without merit.

We reverse and remand for a new trial.

DOWNEY and WALDEN, JJ., and WES-SEL, JOHN D., Associate Judge, concur.

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

Barabas v. Rojas, 481 So. 2d 1003, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6045 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

481 So. 2d 1003 (Barabas v. Rojas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zigman v. Cline
664 So. 2d 968 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
First Union National Bank v. Allen Lorey Family Ltd. Partnership
34 Va. Cir. 474 (Fairfax County Circuit Court, 1994)
Holman ex rel. Holman v. Goldschmidt
550 So. 2d 499 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)