Lake v. Stiegler

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lake v. Stiegler

156 So. 2d 785

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 15, 1963·No. No. 63-87·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, appeals an adverse summary judgment, contending that there was a material issue of fact to be presented to the jury as to whether or not the appellee negligently operated a motor vehicle under his control.

An examination of the record fails to demonstrate that the appellee acted other than as a reasonable person under the emergency circumstances created by the appellant-driver. Therefore, no error has been made to appear in the entry of the summary judgment. See: Harper v. Mangel, Fla.App.1963, 151 So.2d 346.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, appeals an adverse summary judgment, contending that there was a material issue of fact to be presented to the jury as to whether or not the appellee negligently operated a motor vehicle under his control.

An examination of the record fails to demonstrate that the appellee acted other than as a reasonable person under the emergency circumstances created by the appellant-driver. Therefore, no error has been made to appear in the entry of the summary judgment. See: Harper v. Mangel, Fla.App.1963, 151 So.2d 346.

Affirmed.

Lake v. Stiegler, 156 So. 2d 785 (Fla. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

156 So. 2d 785 (Lake v. Stiegler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related