Spivak v. Shaw

725 So. 2d 450, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1292, 1999 WL 68575
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 10, 1999
DocketNo. 98-1408
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 725 So. 2d 450 (Spivak v. Shaw) 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
Spivak v. Shaw, 725 So. 2d 450, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1292, 1999 WL 68575 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment in the defendant’s favor. Here, unlike the facts in Kao v. Lauredo, 617 So.2d 775, 777 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), there was no testimony that the rear end collision occurred because the accident happened “at a place and time where [a sudden stop] was reasonably expected .... ” The defendant, who was driving the rear vehicle, presented evidence that dissipated the presumption of negligence, and the presumption became only a “permissible inference which the jury may or may not draw from the evidence before it.” Eppler v. Tarmac America, Inc., 695 So.2d 775, 777 (Fla. 1st DCA), review granted, 70S So.2d 8 (Fla.1997).

Judgement affirmed.

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

Related

Burton v. Salzberg
725 So. 2d 450 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
725 So. 2d 450, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 1292, 1999 WL 68575, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spivak-v-shaw-fladistctapp-1999.