Miller v. Serrao

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Miller v. Serrao

261 So. 2d 518, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6864

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 2, 1972

DocketNo. 71-711

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 261 So. 2d 518 (Miller v. Serrao) 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

Miller v. Serrao, 261 So. 2d 518, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6864 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant-plaintiff Steve Miller, the cab driver, seeks review of a final judgment entered pursuant to a directed verdict for appellee-defendants Max Serrao (driver of rental car), Biscayne Auto Rentals, Inc. (owner of rental car), and their insurance carriers. The directed verdict was entered in a jury trial of an automobile negligence action arising out of an intersectional collision.

We must view the conflicting evidence, and the inferences reasonably to be drawn from the evidence, in a light most favorable to the appellant. The key issues were whether or not the defendant driver was negligent and whether or not the plaintiff driver was contributorily negligent. Specifically, the questions are whether the defendant ran a stop sign and whether plaintiff should have seen the defendant enter the intersection in time for him to stop. The evidence adduced did present jury questions, so that the trial court erred in entering the directed verdict at the close of plaintiff’s case. St. Germain v. Carpenter, Fla.1956, 84 So.2d 556; see also: Vann v. Hobbs, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 43, 45.

Reversed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant-plaintiff Steve Miller, the cab driver, seeks review of a final judgment entered pursuant to a directed verdict for appellee-defendants Max Serrao (driver of rental car), Biscayne Auto Rentals, Inc. (owner of rental car), and their insurance carriers. The directed verdict was entered in a jury trial of an automobile negligence action arising out of an intersectional collision.

We must view the conflicting evidence, and the inferences reasonably to be drawn from the evidence, in a light most favorable to the appellant. The key issues were whether or not the defendant driver was negligent and whether or not the plaintiff driver was contributorily negligent. Specifically, the questions are whether the defendant ran a stop sign and whether plaintiff should have seen the defendant enter the intersection in time for him to stop. The evidence adduced did present jury questions, so that the trial court erred in entering the directed verdict at the close of plaintiff’s case. St. Germain v. Carpenter, Fla.1956, 84 So.2d 556; see also: Vann v. Hobbs, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 43, 45.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 So. 2d 518, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6864, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-serrao-fladistctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack