Thornton v. Longarzo

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Thornton v. Longarzo

182 So. 2d 303, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5895

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 7, 1966

DocketNos. 5359, 5360

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 182 So. 2d 303 (Thornton v. Longarzo) 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

Thornton v. Longarzo, 182 So. 2d 303, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5895 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs, David Hartley Thornton, et ux, and Ethel Magnat, appeal judgment after verdict for the defendant, Patsy T. Longarzo, in consolidated cases arising out of the same automobile accident.

The Thornton car was stopped for a red light. When the light turned green, said car proceeded forward and began to turn left. Upon the appearance of a small girl on a bicycle entering the intersection, it stopped suddenly and was hit in the rear by the Longarzo car. There was disagreement as to how far the Thornton car had proceeded into the intersection before it stopped and as to whether it had stopped a second time. The issues thus raised were properly submitted to the jury. Hott v. Funk, Fla.App.1964, 165 So.2d 792 and Gulle v. Boggs, Fla.1965, 174 So.2d 26.

The second question raised is the propriety of the court giving an instruction to the jury on sudden emergency. The record reveals there was evidence sufficient to show the possible existence of a sudden [304]*304emergency. The presence or absence of a sudden emergency is a question of fact for the jury. Dupree v. Pitts, Fla.App. 1964, 159 So.2d 904 and Midstate Hauling Co. v. Fowler, Fla.1965, 176 So.2d 87.

Affirmed.

ALLEN, C. J., and SMITH, SHERMAN N., Jr. and ANDREWS, CHARLES O., Jr., Associate Judges, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs, David Hartley Thornton, et ux, and Ethel Magnat, appeal judgment after verdict for the defendant, Patsy T. Longarzo, in consolidated cases arising out of the same automobile accident.

The Thornton car was stopped for a red light. When the light turned green, said car proceeded forward and began to turn left. Upon the appearance of a small girl on a bicycle entering the intersection, it stopped suddenly and was hit in the rear by the Longarzo car. There was disagreement as to how far the Thornton car had proceeded into the intersection before it stopped and as to whether it had stopped a second time. The issues thus raised were properly submitted to the jury. Hott v. Funk, Fla.App.1964, 165 So.2d 792 and Gulle v. Boggs, Fla.1965, 174 So.2d 26.

The second question raised is the propriety of the court giving an instruction to the jury on sudden emergency. The record reveals there was evidence sufficient to show the possible existence of a sudden [304]*304emergency. The presence or absence of a sudden emergency is a question of fact for the jury. Dupree v. Pitts, Fla.App. 1964, 159 So.2d 904 and Midstate Hauling Co. v. Fowler, Fla.1965, 176 So.2d 87.

Affirmed.

ALLEN, C. J., and SMITH, SHERMAN N., Jr. and ANDREWS, CHARLES O., Jr., Associate Judges, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 So. 2d 303, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thornton-v-longarzo-fladistctapp-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack