WILLIAM T. BARRETT, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS NEXT OF FRIEND OF JULIE BARRETT, A MINOR, APPELLANTS,
v.
CLARENCE EUGENE WORDEN, APPELLEE
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 minor child sustained injuries in a vehicular collision when her uncle's car, traveling at high speed westbound, failed to stop at a stop sign and collided with the appellee's northbound vehicle on a through highway. The trial court granted directed verdict for the defendant on the liability issue, and the appellate court affirmed, finding the plaintiff presented insufficient evidence of negligence.
The trial court correctly granted the directed verdict for the defendant. The evidence was insufficient to support a finding of negligence against the defendant, and judgment was affirmed.
“The evidence was, then, insufficient to support a finding of negligence against the defendant.”
The court's conclusion that the plaintiff failed to meet the burden of proving negligence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe accident occurred at the intersection of Krome Avenue and Southwest 216th Street in Dade County. The plaintiff's minor daughter was riding in a ca…
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 Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant brought suit for damages against appellee as a result of injuries sustained by appellant’s minor child, who was riding in an automobile when it collided with the vehicle driven by the appellee.
The accident occurred in Dade County at the intersection of Krome Avenue and Southwest 216th Street. At the time of the accident the child was riding in an automobile being driven by her uncle in a westerly direction at a high rate of speed into the intersection. This vehicle did not stop for the stop sign at 216th Street. A collision occurred with the automobile being operated by the appellee in a northerly direction on Krome Avenue, within the speed limit. Krome Avenue is a through highway and is not controlled by a stop sign or traffic signal. The view of both drivers was unobstructed as they approached this intersection. The evidence indicates that as soon as he saw the automobile in which the appellants’ daughter was riding, appellee applied his brakes and swerved in an attempt to avoid the collision. The collision occurred in the northwest quadrant of the intersection, two feet, eleven inches south of the northwest corner.
The point on appeal is whether the trial court erred in granting defendant’s motion for directed verdict on the issue of liability at the close of plaintiffs’ case.
After careful consideration of the record on appeal, briefs and argument of counsel, we have concluded that the trial court was correct in granting defendant’s motion for directed verdict. The evidence was, then, insufficient to support a finding of negligence against the defendant. Spadaro v. Palmisano, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 418; Tackett v. Hartack, Fla.App.1958, 98 So.2d 896.
Therefore, the judgment appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Barrett v. Worden, 219 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 1968)…Certiorari denied without opinion. 213 So. 2d 311.…
Authorities Cited
- Hiram Tackett, Jr. v. Hartack, 98 So. 2d 896 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957)
- Angeline Spadaro v. Palmisano, 109 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959)