HELEN H. MAZUR AND HER HUSBAND, JOHN A. MAZUR
v.
MITTIE AKE AND HER HUSBAND, FORREST H. AKE; AND JOHN A. MAZUR V. MITTIE AKE AND HER HUSBAND, FORREST H. AKE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed judgments for the defendant in four consolidated cases arising from a single automobile accident. The court found the issues and facts in the Mazur cases to be identical to the Kosak cases, which were also affirmed.
No, the trial court did not err. The issues and facts presented in the Mazur cases were identical to those in the Kosak cases, and the judgments in the Kosak cases were affirmed.
“For the purposes of trial all four cases were consolidated by the trial Judge and the issues in all four of them submitted to the jury and verdicts rendered thereon and judgments entered for the defendant in each of the four cases.”
Describes the procedural consolidation and outcome of the trial court proceedings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHelen H. Mazur and John A. Mazur sued Mittie Ake and Forrest H. Ake for damages resulting from an automobile accident. These cases were consolidated f…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
These are companion cases with those of Polly Kozak and her husband, John Kosak, v. Mittie Ake and her husband, Forrest H. Ake, and John Kosak vs. Mittie Ake and her husband, Forrest H. Ake, decided this date. The claim for damages in the two above styled causes, and the two first above referred to as decided this date, arose out of the same automobile accident. For the purposes of trial all four cases were consolidated by the trial Judge and the issues in all four of them submitted to the jury and verdicts rendered thereon and judgments entered for the defendant in each of the four cases. The causes all came to this Court on one bill of exceptions. The questions raised and the facts as shown by the testimony in the above styled causes are on all fours with the cases of Polly Kosak and John Kosak hereinabove mentioned.
The judgment appealed from herein by the Appellants in the above styled causes are therefore affirmed.
Brown, C. J., Whitfield and Buford, J. J. concur.