MICHAEL DEBOLD, APPELLANT,
v.
THE OCEAN REEF CLUB, INC., ET AL., 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 affirmed a judgment for the defendant in a negligence case, finding no error in the trial court's admission of expert testimony regarding the plaintiff's speed, jury instructions, or responses to jury questions.
A trial court does not err in admitting an investigating officer's expert estimate of a plaintiff's speed when the officer is properly qualified, and any error is harmless when other substantial evidence of negligence is properly admitted.
[1] An investigating officer's expert estimate of a plaintiff's speed is admissible when the officer is properly qualified, and any error in admission is harmless when other…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMichael DeBold was involved in an accident and sued Ocean Reef Club, Inc. A jury verdict was entered against him.…
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 Expert Qualification cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
We find no merit in any of the points the plaintiff-appellant presents for reversal of the judgment entered against him upon a jury verdict for the defendant-appellee. As to the first, the trial court did not err, in the light of the officer’s expert qualifications, in admitting the investigating state trooper’s estimate of the plaintiff’s speed at the time of the accident. Kerr v. Caraway, 78 So. 2d 571 (Fla.1955); Quinn v. Millard, 358 So. 2d 1378 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Waller v. fraud, 301 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974). In any event, the testimony was no more than cumulative to other, indeed, massive evidence of the plaintiff’s negligence which was properly admitted at the trial. Bryant v. Haarala, 245 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971); Myers v. Korbly, 103 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958).
We hold also that the plaintiff’s substantial rights were not adversely affected by the denial of two requested jury charges, since the record shows that, as actually given, the court’s instructions fully and accurately covered the subject matter involved. Florida East Coast R. Co. v. Lawler, 151 So. 2d 852 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963). Finally, we do not agree, as the appellant argues, that the court’s response to a question asked by the jury during the course of its deliberations was in any way incorrect.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Norval M. GUY v. Kight, 431 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)…der.” See Gallagher v. Federal Insurance Company, 346 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). The issues for the jury’s consideration were sufficiently covered and the instructions given were manifestly full, fair and accurate. See De Bold v. Ocean Reef Club, 368 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Davis v. Lewis, 331 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Lynch v. McGovern, 270 So. 2d 770 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). The trial court had the initial responsibility of determining the qualifications and range of subjects on which the exper…
-
Gray Drugfair, Inc. v. Raven Heller & Redevco Corp., 478 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…s & Loan Association v. Wylie, 46 So. 2d 396 (Fla.1950); Ortner v. Linch, 128 So. 2d 152, 155 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960), cert. denied, 138 So. 2d 340 (Fla.1961); Harvey v. Maistrosky, 114 So. 2d 810, 814 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959); DeBold v. Ocean Reef Club, Inc., 368 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Treating the only point which warrants discussion, we adhere to our conclusion in Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Braz, 182 So. 2d 491, 494-95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966), quashed without prejudice on other grounds, 196 So. 2d 109 (Fla.19…
-
Hurlston v. Lyres Bros. S.S. Co., Inc., 409 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…PER CURIAM. Since the jury charges actually given fully and fairly covered the subject matter of the plaintiff-appellant’s proposed special instruction, there was no harmful error, as he contends, in its denial. DeBold v. Ocean Reef Club, Inc., 368 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Florida East Coast R. Co. v. Lawler, 151 So. 2d 852 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963). The other point raised similarly presents no basis for reversal. Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Quinn v. Truman Alan Millard, 358 So. 2d 1378 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Myers v. Korbly, 103 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)
- Kerr v. Caraway, 78 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 1955)
- Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Lawler, 151 So. 2d 852 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- State v. Williams, 301 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Harden L. Bryant & Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Haarala, 245 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)