USA Truck, Inc. v. Contreras

District Court of Appeal of Florida

USA Truck, Inc. v. Contreras

886 So. 2d 243, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 14646, 29 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2235

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 6, 2004

DocketNos. 4D03-1799, 4D03-2485

StatusPublished

This text of 886 So. 2d 243 (USA Truck, Inc. v. Contreras) 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

USA Truck, Inc. v. Contreras, 886 So. 2d 243, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 14646, 29 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2235 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

TAYLOR, J.

This case arises out of a fatal automobile accident which occurred when the car in which the plaintiffs were riding was hit from behind by the defendant’s tractor-[244]*244trailer. Defendant, USA Truck, Inc., appeals consolidated final judgments entered after bifurcated liability and damages trials. We find no error in the trial court’s order directing a verdict on the defendant’s seatbelt defense as to plaintiff Von Pineda. See Zurline v. Levesque, 642 So.2d 1169 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)(holding that the seatbelt defense should not have been submitted to the jury where there was no evidence that failure to wear a seatbelt caused or contributed substantially to producing the plaintiffs damages). We further find no reversible error as to all other issues raised and affirm the final judgments.

AFFIRMED.

GUNTHER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

TAYLOR, J.

This case arises out of a fatal automobile accident which occurred when the car in which the plaintiffs were riding was hit from behind by the defendant’s tractor-[244]*244trailer. Defendant, USA Truck, Inc., appeals consolidated final judgments entered after bifurcated liability and damages trials. We find no error in the trial court’s order directing a verdict on the defendant’s seatbelt defense as to plaintiff Von Pineda. See Zurline v. Levesque, 642 So.2d 1169 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)(holding that the seatbelt defense should not have been submitted to the jury where there was no evidence that failure to wear a seatbelt caused or contributed substantially to producing the plaintiffs damages). We further find no reversible error as to all other issues raised and affirm the final judgments.

AFFIRMED.

GUNTHER and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

886 So. 2d 243, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 14646, 29 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 2235, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/usa-truck-inc-v-contreras-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack