EVELYN BOZARTH AND RALPH BOZARTH, HER HUSBAND, APPELLANTS,
v.
RONALD BARRETO, AND TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Derivative Claims cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The final judgment entered in favor of the defendants Ronald Barreto and his insurer Travelers Insurance Company [upon a jury verdict rendered in their favor below in an action brought under Section 767.01, Florida Statutes (1979)] is affirmed upon a holding that the trial court correctly denied the plaintiffs Evelyn Bozarth and Ralph Bozarth’s motion for a directed verdict at trial on the issue of liability. The cause was properly one for jury determination on liability as there was, in our view, sufficient evidence in the record for the jury to conclude, as it did, that the plaintiff Evelyn Bozarth’s injuries were not proximately caused by any aggressive or affirmative act directed against said plaintiff by the defendant’s dog, which of necessity, would also defeat the plaintiff Ralph Bozarth’s derivative claim. Tiny’s Liquors, Inc. v. Davis, 353 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Smith v. Allison, 332 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Parsons v. Culp (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)
-
Fannin v. Ace Hunter (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…ssive” manner. See Jones v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co., 463 So. 2d 1153, 1157 (Fla. 1985). Therefore, a directed verdict can only be sustained on appeal if there was no evidence rebutting the fact that Finley caused the incident. Cf. Bozarth v. Barreto, 399 So. 2d 370, 370 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (per curiam) (affirming judgment entered for defendant where there was “sufficient evidence in the record for the jury to conclude, as it did, that the plaintiff[’]s injuries were not proximately caused by any aggressive…
Authorities Cited
- Tiny's Liquors, Inc. v. Davis, 353 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Smith v. Allison, 332 So. 2d 631 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)