Burke v. Dade County

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Burke v. Dade County

390 So. 2d 797, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 18161

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 2, 1980

DocketNo. 80-338

StatusPublished

This text of 390 So. 2d 797 (Burke v. Dade County) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burke v. Dade County, 390 So. 2d 797, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 18161 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury regarding a statute not brought into issue by the evidence: Testimony established that the vehicle in question was stopped for traffic, rather than for the pedestrian (plaintiff). But see § 316.-130, Fla.Stat. (1977).

We similarly affirm the court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion for directed verdict. See Stresscon International, Inc. v. Helms, 390 So.2d 139 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury regarding a statute not brought into issue by the evidence: Testimony established that the vehicle in question was stopped for traffic, rather than for the pedestrian (plaintiff). But see § 316.-130, Fla.Stat. (1977).

We similarly affirm the court’s denial of plaintiff’s motion for directed verdict. See Stresscon International, Inc. v. Helms, 390 So.2d 139 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

390 So. 2d 797, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 18161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burke-v-dade-county-fladistctapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack