Ryan v. Gladwell

265 So. 2d 63, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6366
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 1, 1972·No. No. 72-9·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The point presented on this appeal urges that the trial court erred in ruling against the appellants when they moved to amend their answer by asserting a defense “in the nature of res judicata.” During the trial, appellants’ counsel sought to introduce into evidence a “hold harmless agreement” whereby an insurance company for a jointly liable defendant paid the full extent of its coverage in return for plaintiffs’ agreement to hold it harmless from all monetary exposure incurred as a result of the litigation. The court properly held that the execution of this agreement did not constitute a splitting of the cause of action. See Fla.Stat. § 768.041, F.S.A.; Jacksonville Terminal Company v. Misak, Fla.1958, 102 So.2d 295; Clemons v. Clark, Fla.App.1965, 172 So.2d 242.

Affirmed.

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

Ryan v. Gladwell, 265 So. 2d 63, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6366 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

265 So. 2d 63 (Ryan v. Gladwell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jacksonville Terminal Co. v. Misak
102 So. 2d 295 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1958)
Clemons v. Clark
172 So. 2d 242 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1965)