State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Curry

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Curry

608 So. 2d 587, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12447, 1992 WL 353651

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 1, 1992

DocketNo. 91-96

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 608 So. 2d 587 (State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Curry) 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

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Curry, 608 So. 2d 587, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12447, 1992 WL 353651 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

The judgment below is reversed for a new trial because the trial judge (a) instructed the jury in the precise manner determined to be erroneous in the later-decided and controlling case of State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gomez, 605 So.2d 968 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), and (b) incorrectly overruled a defense objection to opposing counsel’s statement — which may stand as the very definition of a golden rule argument — asking the jury to “[p]ut yourself in [the plaintiff’s] position, you can imagine the mental anguish and frustration.” See Klein v. Herring, 347 So.2d 681 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).

Reversed and remanded.

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

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

The judgment below is reversed for a new trial because the trial judge (a) instructed the jury in the precise manner determined to be erroneous in the later-decided and controlling case of State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gomez, 605 So.2d 968 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), and (b) incorrectly overruled a defense objection to opposing counsel’s statement — which may stand as the very definition of a golden rule argument — asking the jury to “[p]ut yourself in [the plaintiff’s] position, you can imagine the mental anguish and frustration.” See Klein v. Herring, 347 So.2d 681 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

608 So. 2d 587, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12447, 1992 WL 353651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-farm-mutual-automobile-insurance-co-v-curry-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack