Crowley v. Kreiger

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Crowley v. Kreiger

217 So. 2d 583, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6361

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 14, 1969

DocketNo. 1440

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 217 So. 2d 583 (Crowley v. Kreiger) 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

Crowley v. Kreiger, 217 So. 2d 583, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6361 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

REED, Judge.

The plaintiff in the trial court and the appellant here, Mose Crowley, filed suit against the defendant and appellee, Charles Kreiger, alleging that the defendant’s wife negligently operated defendant’s motor vehicle in Broward County, Florida, proximately causing a collision with a motor vehicle operated by plaintiff and injuries to the plaintiff. The defendant’s answer denied negligence and pled contributory negligence. The cause was submitted to the trial court without a jury. The trial court found that the plaintiff had not proved by a preponderance of evidence the material allegations of his complaint and entered a final judgment for the defendant from which this appeal was taken.

The evidence tends to show that the plaintiff was driving his automobile south on a two lane road when the collision occurred. The impact between the vehicle driven by the plaintiff and that driven by the defendant’s wife occurred on the west side of the road in the plaintiff’s south bound lane.¹ Under these circumstances the plaintiff, relying on dictum in Florida Motor Lines, Inc. v. Ward, 1931, 102 Fla.1105, 137 So. 163, claims that he is entitled to a presumption of negligence in his favor. The plaintiff argues that because no evidence was submitted to rebut such presumption, the finding of the trial court was in error.

We do not decide whether under the facts of this case the plaintiff is entitled to a presumption of negligence by reason of the place at which the accident occurred. In our opinion, the judgment of the trial court can be sustained on the ground that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence in failing to use reasonable care to maintain a lookout in the direction in which he was traveling. We affirmed the trial court on that theory which is presented by the pleadings and supported by competent substantial evidence, Cohen v. Mohawk, Inc., Fla.1962, 137 So.2d 222.

Affirmed.

OWEN, J., and DOWNEY, JAMES C., Associate Judge, concur.

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

REED, Judge.

The plaintiff in the trial court and the appellant here, Mose Crowley, filed suit against the defendant and appellee, Charles Kreiger, alleging that the defendant’s wife negligently operated defendant’s motor vehicle in Broward County, Florida, proximately causing a collision with a motor vehicle operated by plaintiff and injuries to the plaintiff. The defendant’s answer denied negligence and pled contributory negligence. The cause was submitted to the trial court without a jury. The trial court found that the plaintiff had not proved by a preponderance of evidence the material allegations of his complaint and entered a final judgment for the defendant from which this appeal was taken.

The evidence tends to show that the plaintiff was driving his automobile south on a two lane road when the collision occurred. The impact between the vehicle driven by the plaintiff and that driven by the defendant’s wife occurred on the west side of the road in the plaintiff’s south bound lane.¹ Under these circumstances the plaintiff, relying on dictum in Florida Motor Lines, Inc. v. Ward, 1931, 102 Fla.1105, 137 So. 163, claims that he is entitled to a presumption of negligence in his favor. The plaintiff argues that because no evidence was submitted to rebut such presumption, the finding of the trial court was in error.

We do not decide whether under the facts of this case the plaintiff is entitled to a presumption of negligence by reason of the place at which the accident occurred. In our opinion, the judgment of the trial court can be sustained on the ground that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence in failing to use reasonable care to maintain a lookout in the direction in which he was traveling. We affirmed the trial court on that theory which is presented by the pleadings and supported by competent substantial evidence, Cohen v. Mohawk, Inc., Fla.1962, 137 So.2d 222.

Affirmed.

OWEN, J., and DOWNEY, JAMES C., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

217 So. 2d 583, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6361, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crowley-v-kreiger-fladistctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack