Howard v. Blaine

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Howard v. Blaine

168 So. 2d 163

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 2, 1964

DocketNo. 4415

StatusPublished

This text of 168 So. 2d 163 (Howard v. Blaine) 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

Howard v. Blaine, 168 So. 2d 163 (Fla. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs appeal a judgment for the defendants in an action arising out of an intersectional automobile collision. Mutually stressed as a vital issue was the relative speeds of the respective vehicles, and the case was submitted to the jury on conflicting testimony including testimony offered by a purported expert who was not an eye witness. On careful examination of the record and arguments we cannot conclude that the jury erred in resolving the issues against the plaintiffs and for the defendants.

Affirmed.

WHITE, Acting C. J., ANDREWS, J., and McCORD, GUYTE P., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs appeal a judgment for the defendants in an action arising out of an intersectional automobile collision. Mutually stressed as a vital issue was the relative speeds of the respective vehicles, and the case was submitted to the jury on conflicting testimony including testimony offered by a purported expert who was not an eye witness. On careful examination of the record and arguments we cannot conclude that the jury erred in resolving the issues against the plaintiffs and for the defendants.

Affirmed.

WHITE, Acting C. J., ANDREWS, J., and McCORD, GUYTE P., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 So. 2d 163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/howard-v-blaine-fladistctapp-1964.