Torts — Negligence — Comparative — Automobile accident — Rear-end collision — Trial court erred in granting partial summary judgment finding defendant solely liable for rear-end collision as a matter of law — There was sufficient evidence from which a jury could have inferred that plaintiff was partially liable for collision where there were significant differences in parties’ deposition testimony regarding whether or not plaintiff engaged her brakes and veered in and out of turn lane, and whether or not plaintiff came to a rolling stop or only slowed down slightly — Partial summary judgment is affirmed to the extent that it found defendant was negligent where undisputed evidence established that defendant was following plaintiff too closely just prior to collision — Remand for new trial at which issue of comparative negligence should be considered by jury
44 Fla. L. Weekly D660a
The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.
opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index