JEANNETTE GUTIERREZ,
v.
OSCAR DE LEON, ET AL.,
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.
A jury's award of past medical damages is against the manifest weight of the evidence when it awards only $9,836.61 despite undisputed evidence of over $48,000 in reasonable medical expenses incurred shortly after the accident, even where conflicting evidence exists regarding causation of more extensive injuries.
[1] A jury's award of past medical damages is against the manifest weight of the evidence when it is unsupported by undisputed evidence of reasonable medical expenses incurre…
[2] When a defendant's own expert acknowledges the reasonableness of certain medical services and the defendant's billing expert does not challenge the reasonableness of the…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“However, the defense's expert, Dr. Jarolem, acknowledged that it was reasonable for Ms. Gutierrez to go to the emergency room and to receive other services shortly after the accident in order to address her pain. Further, the defense's billing expert did not challenge the reasonableness of these bills, which totaled over $48,000.”
This establishes that undisputed evidence supported at least $48,000 in reasonable medical expenses, making the jury's award of $9,836.61 unsupported by the evidence.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMs. Gutierrez was injured in a motor vehicle accident caused by Mr. De Leon's failure to yield the right of way. She presented medical bills totaling …
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 Motor Vehicle Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed January5, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
Nos. 3D20-810 & 3D20-1266 Lower Tribunal No. 18-38944 ________________
Jeannette Gutierrez, Appellant,
vs.
Oscar De Leon, et al., Appellees.
Appeals from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Alexander Bokor, Judge.
Wasson & Associates, Chartered, and Roy D. Wasson; Fournaris & Sanet, P.A., and Theodore J. Fournaris, for appellant.
Conroy Simberg, and Hinda Klein (Hollywood), for appellees.
Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LINDSEY and HENDON, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
In these consolidated appeals, the plaintiff below, Jeannette Gutierrez
2 (“Ms. Gutierrez”), appeals from (1) a final judgment finding that she “takes nothing from this action” and the defendants below, Oscar De Leon (“Mr. De Leon”) and Florida Westside Trucking Corp. (“Florida Westside Trucking”) (collectively, “Defendants”), “shall go hence without a day,” which judgment was entered pursuant to the jury’s verdict and the set off of the PIP benefits received by Ms. Gutierrez (“Final Judgment”); and (2) an agreed order granting attorney’s fees and costs to Florida Westside Trucking pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442. We affirm, in part; reverse, in part; and remand with instructions. In October 2017, Ms. Gutierrez was involved in a motor vehicle accident with a dump truck. Ms. Gutierrez filed a negligence action against the driver of the dump truck, Mr. De Leon, and the owner of the dump truck, Florida Westside Trucking. Ms. Gutierrez alleged that Mr. De Leon failed to yield the right of way, causing the dump truck he was driving to collide into her vehicle, and as a result she sustained permanent injuries. The Defendants raised the affirmative defense of comparative fault and challenged whether Ms. Gutierrez’s injuries, including two herniated discs, were caused by the accident. The case proceeded to a jury trial. The jury returned a verdict finding
3 (1) both Ms. Gutierrez and Mr. De Leon negligent, assigning 80% of the fault to Ms. Gutierrez and 20% of the fault to Mr. De Leon; (2) Ms. Gutierrez sustained damages in the amount of $9,838.61 for past medical expenses and $1,000 for past lost earnings; and (3) Ms. Gutierrez did not suffer a permanent injury or disfigurement as a result of the accident. Ms. Gutierrez filed a motion for new trial, arguing, among other things, that the jury’s verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. The trial court denied Ms. Gutierrez’s motion for new trial. The Defendants moved to set off the jury’s verdict by the PIP benefits received by Ms. Gutierrez. By agreed order, the trial court granted the motion for PIP setoff. The trial court then entered the Final Judgment, which provides that Ms. Gutierrez “takes nothing from this action” and the Defendants “shall go hence without a day.” Thereafter, the trial court entered an agreed order awarding attorney’s fees and costs to Florida Westside Trucking pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442. This appeal followed. In her appeal from the Final Judgment, Ms. Gutierrez has raised three issues. Based on our review of the trial transcript and the evidence introduced during trial, we conclude that the following two issues do not merit discussion: (1) whether the jury’s finding that Ms. Gutierrez was 80%
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Aircraft Serv. Int'l, Inc. v. Jackson, 768 So. 2d 1094 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- Cabrera v. Wal-Mart Stores E., LP, 314 So. 3d 570 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)