BARBARA ANN VUKOVICH, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES LEO, MICHELE LEO, AND STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, 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 appellant was the sole proximate cause of the accident, and thus could not prevail.
Appellant proceeded into an intersection after stopping at a stop sign and collided with appellees' vehicle, which had the right of way. The accident …
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 Question Of Law Vs. Question Of Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
HENDRY, Judge.
Appellant Barbara Vukovich appeals from an adverse final summary judgment entered in favor of appellees upon a finding that appellant was the sole proximate cause of the automobile accident which is the basis of the instant action. We affirm.
The accident occurred at the intersection of N.E. 163 Street and N.E. 4th Avenue. Appellant testified that she stopped at the stop sign on N.E. 4th Avenue, observed no oncoming traffic, and proceeded to cross the intersection. As she did so, she struck the rear panel of appellees’ automobile, which had the right of way through the intersection. The accident occurred on a clear afternoon with dry roads. Appellees’ accident reconstructionist, Dr. Charles Ku-rucz, testified that based on the physical evidence, appellees’ vehicle was traveling between 26 and 37 miles per hour and that appellant was traveling between 10 and 25 miles per hour. Summary judgment should be exercised with special caution in negligence actions. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40, 46 (Fla.1966); Smith v. Smith, 413 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Issues of negligence and probable cause are ordinarily questions for the jury if reasonable men can arrive at different conclusions, but these issues can become questions of law if the facts point to but one possible conclusion. Cassel v. Price, 396 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 1st DCA), rev. denied, 407 So. 2d 1102 (Fla.1981); Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Co. v. Griffis, 381 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
After careful consideration of the record on appeal, briefs filed, and oral arguments, we conclude that appellees met their burden of proving that under the facts of this case, appellant cannot prevail. Florida East Coast Railway Co. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 438 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Citizens Bank of Perry v. Harlie Lynch Construction Co., Inc., 426 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Burkett v. Parker, 410 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nolan P. Chipman v. Chonin, 597 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…hese damages must be attributable to Chipman himself, since he chose to voluntarily accept his former employer’s settlement offer. Accordingly, the trial court correctly entered final summary judgment in favor of the defendants. See Vukovich v. Leo, 447 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (where reasonable minds cannot differ, proximate cause becomes a question of law). Affirmed. . The record indicates that: (1) the defendant properly withdrew from the case ten months before trial was scheduled; (2) Chipman en…
-
Martinez v. Letica Corp., 617 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…t unmindful that a summary judgment should be exercised with special caution in negligence actions. U-Haul Co. of East Bay v. Meyer, 586 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Carbajo v. City of Hialeah, 514 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Vukovich v. Leo, 447 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). However, a summary judgment is properly granted even in negligence cases where there is no genuine issue of material fact. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966); McCabe v. Walt Disney World Co., 350 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 4th DCA 1…
-
Alina Matilde Vieta v. Allstate Ins. Co., 493 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…[*1126] PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Vukovich v. Leo, 447 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Cassel v. Price, 396 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Cooper v. State, 396 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 438 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Burkett v. Don L. Parker and wife, 410 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Griffis, 381 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)
- The Citizens Bank OF Perry v. Harlie Lynch Constr. Co., Inc., 426 So. 2d 52 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Smith v. Parks Smith, 413 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)