Garrett v. State Road Department

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Garrett v. State Road Department

212 So. 2d 830, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5374

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 6, 1968

DocketNo. K-43

StatusPublished

This text of 212 So. 2d 830 (Garrett v. State Road Department) 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

Garrett v. State Road Department, 212 So. 2d 830, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5374 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause has been orally argued before the court and the briefs and record on appeal have been read and given full consideration. It is our view that the legal effect and probative force of the evidence in the case sub judice is factually distinguishable from that present in the case of Anderson v. State Road Department¹ on which appellants rely for reversal. We are further of the view that the evidence in this case more nearly conforms with that present in the case of .State Road Department v. Falcon,² and that our conclusion should be controlled by the decision rendered in that case. Appellants having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the trial court hereby appealed is affirmed. •

WIGGINTON, C. J., and JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause has been orally argued before the court and the briefs and record on appeal have been read and given full consideration. It is our view that the legal effect and probative force of the evidence in the case sub judice is factually distinguishable from that present in the case of Anderson v. State Road Department¹ on which appellants rely for reversal. We are further of the view that the evidence in this case more nearly conforms with that present in the case of .State Road Department v. Falcon,² and that our conclusion should be controlled by the decision rendered in that case. Appellants having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the judgment of the trial court hereby appealed is affirmed. •

WIGGINTON, C. J., and JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 So. 2d 830, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garrett-v-state-road-department-fladistctapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack