Furtado ex rel. Furtado v. Walmer

673 So. 2d 568, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5169, 1996 WL 271550
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 22, 1996·No. No. 94-3533·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

We find no error in the trial court’s failure to grant appellants’ request for a jury instruction on aggravation of a preexisting condition.

Although we conclude that the trial court erred in precluding appellants’ counsel from eliciting the identity of the insurance carrier in his redirect examination of Dr. Alexakis, see Krawzak v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 660 So.2d 306 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), rev. granted, 670 So.2d 938 (Fla.1996), we find such error to be harmless under the circumstances of this case. Accordingly, we affirm.

GLICKSTEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur. POLEN, J., dissents with opinion.

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

Furtado ex rel. Furtado v. Walmer, 673 So. 2d 568, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5169, 1996 WL 271550 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

673 So. 2d 568 (Furtado ex rel. Furtado v. Walmer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Medina v. Peralta
724 So. 2d 1188 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1999)
Medina v. Peralta
705 So. 2d 703 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)