DERRICK C. FURTADO, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND, THOMAS FURTADO, AND HIS MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND, LAUREN FURTADO, AND THOMAS FURTADO, INDIVIDUALLY, AND LAUREN FURTADO, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANTS,
v.
BETH WALMER, DAVID WALMER, AND STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE CO., A FOREIGN CORP., APPELLEES
PER CURIAM.
We find no error in the trial court’s failure to grant appellants’ request for a jury instruction on aggravation of a preexisting condition.
Although we conclude that the trial court erred in precluding appellants’ counsel from eliciting the identity of the insurance carrier in his redirect examination of Dr. Alexakis, see Krawzak v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 660 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), rev. granted, 670 So. 2d 938 (Fla.1996), we find such error to be harmless under the circumstances of this case. Accordingly, we affirm.
GLICKSTEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur. POLEN, J., dissents with opinion.
POLEN, Judge,
dissenting.
Although the trial court did not have the benefit of our opinion in Krawzak v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 660 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), rev. granted, 670 So. 2d 938 (Fla.1996), it appears that in a suit for uninsured/underinsured motorist benefits, the insurance carrier may now be identified to the jury as a party in the lawsuit. The majority acknowledges it was error for the trial court to preclude appellants’ counsel from mentioning appellee State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. in his redirect examination of Dr. Alexakis, appellee having opened the door on cross. However, they find the error to be harmless. I disagree, and would reverse for a new trial on this ground.
I agree that no reversible error is demonstrated by the trial court’s refusal to give a jury instruction on aggravation of a preexisting condition.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Anderson A. Medina, Sr. v. Peralta, 724 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 1999)…[*1189] WELLS, J. We have for review Medina v. Peralta, 705 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998), which certified conflict with Furtado v. Walmer, 673 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We approve Medina for the reasons expressed herein and hold that it is per se reversible error for a trial court to exclude from a jury the identity of an uninsured or underin…1 / 3
-
Anderson A. Medina, Sr. v. Peralta, 705 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…ly joined in the action against the tort-feasor.” In so holding, the Court disapproved the holding of Colford upon which the trial judge relied. The dissent takes the position articulated by the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Furtado v. Walmer, 673 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 4th [*704] DCA 1996), and Judge Klein’s special concurrence in State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Miller, 688 So. 2d 935, 936 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), that Krawzak violations are subject to harmless error analysis. We have carefully reviewed the Su…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Krawzak v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. (#09245) & Candace Lyn Lippincott, 660 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)