JOHN HENRY COLLARD AND ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
LOUELLA KEETON AND LAWRENCE KENLEY KEETON, APPELLEES
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 court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on comparative negligence for the passenger's claim, and the exclusion of hospital records was not reversible error.
Defendants appealed a jury verdict in a personal injury action arising from a car accident. They argued the court erred by refusing to instruct the ju…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Cumulative Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendants to the counterclaim have appealed a final judgment based on a jury verdict in a personal injury action arising out of an automobile intersectional collision. They have .presented ten points for reversal. We consider that only two of these points require discussion at this time. As to the remaining points, it is sufficient to state that we have examined the record in light of them and in light of the arguments pertaining thereto and have concluded that reversible error has not been shown.
Appellants’ first point claims error upon an alleged refusal of the court to instruct the jury on the issue of comparative negligence as to the appellee-driver and his wife. No error is shown as to the claim of the appellee-passenger. See Hammack v. Veillette, Fla.App. 1970, 233 So. 2d 836. As to the claim of the driver husband, the record reveals (a) the failure to submit a proper instruction, and (b) the failure to object upon the court’s announcement of the instructions that it would give.
Appellants’ point directed to the failure to admit certain hospital records does not present reversible error inasmuch as it appears that the declared purpose for the admission was simply to compile cumulative evidence as to the claimed tendency toward hypochondria. See Florida East Coast Railway Company v. Morgan, Fla. App.1968, 213 So. 2d 632.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Atl. Coast Dev. Corp. v. Napoleon Steel Contractors, Inc., 385 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…le v. Edwards, supra. Initially, we point out that the failure of a party to request an omitted instruction or to object to the admission of a particular instruction precludes that party from raising as error that point on appeal. Collard v. Keeton, 317 So. 2d 121 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975) and Fleitas v. Robinson, 273 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). Additionally, we point out that the instructions which were actually given are in accordance and premised on the cases relied upon in Houdaille Industries, Inc. v. Edward…
-
Preferred Risk Mut. Ins. Co. v. Saboda, 489 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)…tiff below to establish wanton negligence, not that of the defendants. If the plaintiff was wrongfully denied consideration of this issue by the verdict form, that point was not preserved by objection below or by cross-appeal. See Collard v. Keeton, 317 So. 2d 121 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). In any event, question number three was rendered moot by the jury’s answers to questions numbers one and two, determining that Sanders’ conduct in killing Saboda was not intentional and that Sanders was mentally deranged to the…
-
Mariano Pasqua, Jr. v. Burns, 383 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…and briefs and have concluded that no reversible error has been demonstrated. See Texas Skaggs, Inc. v. Joannides, 372 So. 2d 985 (Fla.2d DCA 1979); Dade County v. O.K. Auto Parts of Miami, Inc., 360 So. 2d 441 (Fla.3d DCA 1978); Collard v. Keeton, 317 So. 2d 121 (Fla.3d DCA 1975); Forster v. Red Top Sedan Service, Inc., 257 So. 2d 95 (Fla.3d DCA 1972); Sixty-Six, Inc. v. Finley, 224 So. 2d 381 (Fla.3d DCA 1969); Sands v. Ivy Liquors, Inc., 192 So. 2d 775 (Fla.3d DCA 1966); Hill v. Sadler, 186 So. 2d 52 (Fla…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Morgan, 213 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Hammack v. Veillette, 233 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)