Divella v. Hurst

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Divella v. Hurst

101 So. 2d 163

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 27, 1958

DocketNo. 57-319

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 101 So. 2d 163 (Divella v. Hurst) 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

Divella v. Hurst, 101 So. 2d 163 (Fla. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a jury verdict for the defendant in an action arising out of a collision at a street intersection. Appellants point out that as to the plaintiff-wife, who was a passenger in her husband’s car, the verdict could stand only if there is evidence in the record from which the jury could have found that the negligence of the plaintiff-husband was the sole proximate cause of the accident. We conclude from a careful examination of the record that the jury could have found that the plaintiffs simply failed to prove negligence on the part of anyone.

The judgment is affirmed upon authority of Jones v. Stoddard, 138 Fla. 458, 189 So. 400 and cases cited therein.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a jury verdict for the defendant in an action arising out of a collision at a street intersection. Appellants point out that as to the plaintiff-wife, who was a passenger in her husband’s car, the verdict could stand only if there is evidence in the record from which the jury could have found that the negligence of the plaintiff-husband was the sole proximate cause of the accident. We conclude from a careful examination of the record that the jury could have found that the plaintiffs simply failed to prove negligence on the part of anyone.

The judgment is affirmed upon authority of Jones v. Stoddard, 138 Fla. 458, 189 So. 400 and cases cited therein.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 So. 2d 163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/divella-v-hurst-fladistctapp-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack