Hobbs v. Sauers

359 So. 2d 914, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16108
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 20, 1978·No. No. 77-453·Published

Opinion

KEHOE, Judge.

Appellant, plaintiff below, appeals a final judgment entered pursuant to a directed verdict in favor of appellees. We reverse.

Appellant brought the instant action as a result of injuries she allegedly sustained in an automobile accident with appellee Floyd M. Sauers. The gravamen of appellant’s complaint was that, because of the accident, she had sustained permanent injury within reasonable medical probability. § 627.737, Fla.Stat. (1975).

During the course of the trial, the testimony of one of appellant’s witnesses, Jordan Davis, M.D., was excluded from evidence. Doctor Davis’s testimony involved, among other things, the permanency of appellant’s injuries. However, the trial court determined that Dr. Davis was an “examining physician” who was ineligible to testify under the rationale of Marshall v. Papineau, 132 So.2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961), and its progeny. Thereafter, at the close of appellant’s case, the trial court entered a directed verdict in favor of appellees. Pursuant to the directed verdict, the trial court entered a final judgment in favor of appel-[915] lees. From this final judgment, appellant appeals.

Appellant contends that Dr. Davis’s testimony was improperly excluded because he was not an “examining physician” under the rationale of the Marshall case, but rather was a “treating physician” whose testimony in regard to appellant’s complaint was an exception to the hearsay rule.

We agree with appellant’s contention. Our review of the record leads us to the conclusion that Dr. Davis was a “treating physician” whose testimony was improperly excluded from evidence by the trial court. Further, we are of the opinion that if Dr. Davis’s testimony had been admitted, it would have created a justiciable issue of fact which was properly determinable by the jury. See Parker v. Martin, 338 So.2d 230 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Bill Kelley Chevrolet, Inc. v. Kerr, 258 So.2d 280 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); Steiger v. Massachusetts Casualty Insurance Co., 253 So.2d 882 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); and City of Hialeah v. Hutchins, 215 So.2d 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968).

Accordingly, the final judgment entered by the trial court is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Reversed.

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

Hobbs v. Sauers, 359 So. 2d 914, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16108 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

359 So. 2d 914 (Hobbs v. Sauers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bill Kelley Chevrolet, Inc. v. Kerr
258 So. 2d 280 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1972)
Marshall v. Papineau
132 So. 2d 786 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1961)
Steiger v. Massachusetts Casualty Insurance Company
253 So. 2d 882 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1971)
City of Hialeah v. Hutchins
215 So. 2d 496 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)
Parker v. Martin
338 So. 2d 230 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)