ALBERT A. PASS, APPELLANT,
v.
RUBIN FRIEDMAN ET AL., APPELLEES; GERALD CLIFFORD FREWER, APPELLANT, V. RUBIN FRIEDMAN 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.
In this negligence case arising from a four-car collision on a causeway, the court affirmed summary judgment for defendant Friedman, who had stopped his disabled vehicle on the roadway to repair a flat tire. The appellants, Pass and Frewer, challenged the summary judgment, but the court found no genuine issue of material fact and that Friedman was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Summary judgment was properly entered in favor of Friedman because there was no genuine issue of material fact and Friedman was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
“Summary judgment is proper where there remains no genuine issue as to any material fact and where the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
Establishes the legal standard for summary judgment that the court applied to affirm the lower court's decision.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn January 31, 1960, Friedman stopped his car in the eastbound lane of a causeway to repair a flat tire, over 500 feet beyond the crest of the bridge.…
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 Cross-Claim For Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
These appeals were argued together and this opinion shall be determinative of both such appeals.
The appeals are from a summary final judgment entered in favor of the defendant, Friedman.
On January 31, 1960, at approximately 8:45 P.M., defendant, Friedman was operating his car in an easterly direction on a causeway between Miami and Miami Beach, Florida. After crossing the crest of the bridge, defendant, Friedman stopped his car in the lane nearest the center divider of the causeway to repair a flat tire. The car was brought to a stop at a distance of more than five hundred feet beyond the crest of the bridge and remained there for approximately one-half hour before the four-car accident in question. During this time, Friedman went to a service station for assistance. The lights of the disabled vehicle were left on and the record reveals that, prior to the accident, Friedman’s car was visible to cars traveling the easterly route over the causeway.
The accident occurred shortly after cars driven by Lawrence Bates and the plaintiff, Pass were brought to a stop behind Friedman’s car because the lane in which they were traveling was blocked by the disabled car. The Pass’ car (car #3) then collided with the Bates’ car (car #2) when hit from behind by the car driven by the cross-plaintiff, Frewer (car #4).
On July, 1960, Pass (car '#3) filed his complaint for damages against Friedman (car #1) and Frewer (car #4) alleging negligence on the part of the defendants in causing the four-car collision. On December 8, 1960, the defendant, Frewer, inter alia, cross-claimed for damages against the defendant Friedman alleging that the latter was negligent in causing the accident in question. Subsequently, the cause was transferred to the circuit court and, after a hearing on the defendant, Friedman’s motion for summary judgment which motion had attached thereto the affidavit of Lawrence Bates (car # 2), the circuit court entered a summary final judgment in favor of the defendant, Friedman (car .#1) and against the plaintiff and cross-claimant.
We'have carefully reviewed the record and we find that we must affirm the judgment appealed. ■ .
Summary judgment is proper where there remains no genuine issue as to any *885material fact and where the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Ryan v. Unity, Inc., Fla.1951, 55 So.2d 117; Clark v. City of Atlantic Beach, Fla.App. 1960, 124 So.2d 305.
The instant case presents no triable issue for the jury. All the facts are clear and the trial judge correctly decided that the defendant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.'
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gibson v. AVIS Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc., 386 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 1980)…son and McNealy settled their dispute and Gibson appealed the ruling as it applied to Arata and Avis. The district court affirmed, citing Nuno v. Balz, 255 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971) cert. dismissed 265 So. 2d 10 (Fla.1972), and Pass v. Friedman, 140 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962) cert. denied 146 So. 2d 752 (Fla.1962). This Court has certiorari jurisdiction based on conflict when a district court of appeal misapplies the law by relying on a decision which involves a situation materially at variance with t…1 / 2
-
Gibson v. AVIS Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc., 362 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…ime to avoid an accident (as other automobiles had done) by changing lanes and his negligence on the road amounted to an efficient intervening cause relieving appellees of liability. Nuno v. Balz, 255 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Pass v. Friedman, 140 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962); compare Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. Garland, 269 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972), wherein the original tortfeasor’s act actually produced the second act of negligence. Accordingly, the final judgment entered in accordance wit…
-
Katz v. Harrington, 226 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…was working on the car’s starting mechanism. The court determined that a summary judgment for the defendant had been properly entered, citing Cochran v. Abercrombie, Fla.App.1960, 118 So. 2d 636, 79 A.L.R.2d 986, and Pass v. Friedman, Fla.App. 1962, 140 So. 2d 883. What particularly distinguishes the Cochran case from the present case is the fact that the plaintiff there was injured while he was a licensee on the defendant’s premises. The court held that under the facts of that case the plaintiff-licensee cou…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Clark v. City OF Atl. Beach, 124 So. 2d 305 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960)
- Ryan v. Unity, Inc., 55 So.2d 117 (Fla. 1951)