JACK SHERWIN GRAFF AND KALE AUTO LEASING COMPANY, INC., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
JENNIE BRODA BELAK AND HUSBAND, W. J. BELAK, APPELLEES

Fla. 1st DCA | 1969-01-07
No. K-251
RAWLS, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON, J., concur.
217 So. 2d 581 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1969)

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.

Synopsis

This case reviews a jury verdict for plaintiffs in an automobile collision case. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's conclusion that the plaintiff's mental injury was causally related to the accident.


Holding

Yes, the evidence was legally sufficient to support the jury's finding that the plaintiff's mental injury was causally related to the accident.


Key Quotes

“The only substantial question raised by appellants in support of reversal of the judgment is whether the evidence given by the psychiatrist who testified as an expert witness was legally sufficient to support the jury's finding that the plaintiff's mental injury was causally related to the accident.”

This quote states the central legal issue on appeal.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The case arose from an automobile collision. The plaintiffs were awarded a judgment based on a jury verdict. The defendants appealed, challenging the …

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.


Opinion of the Court
SPECTOR, Judge.

SPECTOR, Judge.

Defendants seek review of a judgment entered upon a jury verdict for the plaintiffs in an action arising from an automobile collision.

The only substantial question raised by appellants in support of reversal of the judgment is whether the evidence given by the psychiatrist who testified as an expert witness was legally sufficient to support the jury’s finding that the plaintiff’s mental injury was causally related to the accident.

Our review of the record, briefs, and consideration of the oral arguments of counsel lead us to the conclusion that the verdict and judgment thereon was supported by competent and substantial evidence; and the same should therefore stand undisturbed. See the text of the court’s opinion under headnotes 6 and 7 in Raydel, Ltd. v. Medcalfe, 162 So.2d 910 (Fla.App.3d 1964), decision quashed on other grounds, Fla., 178 So.2d 569.

Affirmed.

RAWLS, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw