LOIS SCHIFFMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
POWELL SYSTEM, INC. D/B/A BUDGET RENT-A-CAR OF FLORIDA, AND ANNA B. ALLEVA, APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 1971-04-06
No. 70-752
Before PEARSON, C. J., and BARK-DULL and SWANN, JJ.
246 So. 2d 171 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1971) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to give a sudden emergency jury instruction or in giving a contributory negligence instruction.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff sued for damages from a car accident with the defendant. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed.…

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
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff below, Lois Schiffman, sued the defendants (appellees) and sought to recover for damages she allegedly suffered and incurred as a result of an automobile accident with Anna B. Alieva. The jury verdict was for the defendants and plaintiff appeals from the final judgment rendered thereon.

She raises three points on appeal and they all have reference to the jury instructions. At the charge conference the trial judge stated he would not give a charge requested by plaintiff orally on the doctrine of sudden emergency. On appeal plaintiff says the refusal to give this charge was reversible error. We find no error in the refusal of the trial judge to give a charge to the jury on the doctrine of sudden emergency under the facts presented in this case. See Smith v. Cobb, Fla.1952, 61 So.2d 378; LeSuer v. State Road Department, Fla.App.1970, 231 So.2d 265; Rule 1.470(b), R.C.P., *17230 F.S.A. and Florida Standard Jury Instructions 4.8.

We have examined the plaintiff’s second point on appeal and find it to be without merit. See Medina v. McAllister, Fla.1967, 202 So.2d 755; Warmuth v. Greenberg, Fla.1951, 49 So.2d 793; Carver v. Jenkins, Fla.App.1968, 209 So.2d 882; and Zanetti v. Weissler, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 383. In addition, we note that no objection was made in the trial court to this point which is argued on appeal. Cf. Advance Company v. Albert, Fla.App.1969, 216 So.2d 474.

Plaintiff’s third point is that the court committed error in giving an instruction to the jury on contributory negligence when there was no evidence to support such a charge. The pleadings raised the issue of the contributory negligence of plaintiff and we find sufficient evidence in the record on appeal to support a charge by the trial court on this issue.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Rittenbery v. Eddins, 272 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)
    …eous as a matter of law, the order should be reversed and the cause remanded with directions that judgment be entered on the verdict. . Sun Insurance Office, Ltd. v. Noel (Fla. App.1971) 254 So. 2d 7; Schiffman v. Powell System, Inc. (Fla.App.1971) 246 So. 2d 171; Marlowe v. State, 139 Fla. 307, 190 So. 602; Prevatt v. State, 135 Fla. 226, 184 So. 860.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw