BONNIE MICKLER
v.
REBECCA DILEY TRIPLETT AND LUCILLE A. HARNAGE
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.
Bonnie Mickler appeals a directed verdict on causation granted to plaintiff Rebecca Triplett in a car accident injury case. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that causation was a question for the jury because Mickler presented evidence that Triplett's injuries could have resulted from prior accidents rather than the 2019 collision.
The court held that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict on causation. Causation is a jury question when the defendant contests it and presents evidence that the plaintiff's injuries could have been caused by something other than the accident in question, even if the plaintiff was treated for injury shortly after the accident.
[1] When a defendant presents evidence disputing causation and offering alternative explanations for plaintiff's injuries, the issue of whether defendant's negligence was the…
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 intelligence“In a joint pre-trial statement, the parties agreed that whether Mickler's negligence caused loss, injury or damage to Triplett was one of the issues that remained to be litigated.”
Establishes that causation was explicitly designated as a disputed issue at the outset of trial
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 2019, Rebecca Triplett was struck from behind in traffic. She declined immediate treatment but visited a walk-in clinic hours later, where x-rays w…
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 Causation In Tort Law cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________
Case No. 5D2023-2554 LT Case No. 2020-CA-4152 _____________________________
BONNIE LEE MICKLER,
Appellant,
v.
REBECCA DILEY TRIPLETT and LUCILLE A. HARNAGE,
Appellees.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Robert M. Dees, Judge.
Kevin D. Franz, and Jennifer A. Karr, of Boyd & Jenerette, P.A., Boca Raton, for Appellant.
Aaron Sprague, and Dana Jacobs, and Fraz Ahmed, of Coker Law, Jacksonville, for Appellee, Rebecca Diley Triplett.
No Appearance for Remaining Appellee.
November 15, 2024
HARRIS, J.
Rebecca Triplett sued Bonnie Mickler in 2020 claiming injuries arising out of a 2019 car accident. In defense, Mickler argued in part that Triplett’s alleged injuries predated the 2019
accident1 and that she did not suffer any injuries as a result of this accident. In a joint pre-trial statement, the parties agreed that whether Mickler’s negligence caused loss, injury or damage to Triplett was one of the issues that remained to be litigated.
During her case-in-chief, Triplett testified that she was sitting in stop-and-go traffic when she was hit from behind. She declined any treatment at the scene but several hours later, she visited a walk-in clinic, where she got x-rays and was prescribed anti-inflammatory medication and muscle relaxers. Weeks later, she began treatment with a chiropractor, which proved to be unsuccessful, and she was ultimately referred for surgery.
Following the trial, which included significant testimony from treatment providers and expert witnesses, Triplett moved for directed verdict on the issue of causation, arguing that there was no dispute that she was treated for a strained/sprained neck at the walk-in clinic on the day of the accident. Therefore, according to Triplett, Mickler’s negligence was the legal cause of at least some damage to Triplett. The trial court agreed, granted the partial directed verdict, and removed the issue of causation from the jury instructions. The jury subsequently returned a verdict exceeding 1.6 million dollars. Following the denial of Mickler’s motion for new trial, this appeal ensued.
The precise issue in this case was recently addressed by our sister court in Lancheros v. Burke, 375 So. 3d 927 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023). In Lancheros, on remarkably similar facts, the court reversed a directed verdict entered in plaintiff’s favor on the issue of causation. The defense in that case contested causation, rebutted plaintiff’s medical and other causation evidence, and presented evidence showing that plaintiff’s injuries could have been caused by something other than the accident in question. We reach the same conclusion in this case as did the court in Lancheros and find Triplett’s attempts to distinguish Lancheros to be wholly unpersuasive.
Concluding that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict in this case, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
LAMBERT, and MACIVER, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Hernando J. Lancheros & VL Auto Transp., Inc. v. Burke, 375 So. 3d 927 (Fla. 6th DCA 2023)