JOHN BRINKLEY AND VINCENTA BRINKLEY, APPELLANT,
v.
SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH COMPANY, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Independent Intervening Cause cases and more on FLexlaw
NATHAN, Judge.
This appeal questions the correctness of a summary final judgment rendered in favor of the defendant, Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Company, in a personal injury action stemming from an accident in which the telephone booth owned by the defendant, and occupied by the plaintiff, John Brinkley, located in a shopping center parking lot, was struck by an automobile. The automobile was owned by a third party, and the driver was allegedly drunk at the time of the accident.
We have examined the record on appeal, and have concluded that there are genuine issues of material fact in this case which are triable by jury, including foreseeability; the negligence of Southern Bell; and whether the actions of the driver of the automobile constituted an independent intervening cause. See Wills v. Sears, Roebuck & Company, 351 So. 2d 29 (Fla.1977); Vining v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 354 So. 2d 54 (Fla.1977). Defendant not having been entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the summary final judgment is, therefore,
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Gonzalez v. State, 392 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…ically allowing the defendant to test the legality of the sentence by filing a Rule 3.850 motion in the trial court. In Jones v. State, 341 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), this court followed the procedure announced in Noble. Then, in Engel v. State, 353 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), where the defendant’s sole contention, raised for the first time on appeal, was that the imposition of separate sentences for offenses which were facets of the same transaction was unlawful, we relied on Noble and Jones and again…
-
Smith v. State, 378 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…act. Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the notice and the findings in regard to the sentencing hearing. These objections were never raised in the trial court, and, therefore, are not available to the defendant on this appeal. Engel v. State, 353 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). In accordance with the foregoing principles, the judgments of conviction and sentences appealed are affirmed, without prejudice to defendant’s right to seek appropriate relief, e. g., by Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. AFFIRMED. ORFINGER…
-
Jones v. State, 384 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…public. This objection was not raised before the trial court and, therefore, is not available to the defendant on this appeal. Smith v. State, 378 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). See also Clark v. State, 363 So. 2d 331 (Fla.1978) and Engel v. State, 353 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). The appellant also seeks correction of the judgment and sentence to reflect that he did not enter a plea of guilty but was tried by jury, and the state agrees to this. Finally, the appellant contends that Special Condition 11 o…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wills v. Sears, 351 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 1977)
- Vining v. AVIS Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc., 354 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 1977)