SPIVAK v. SHAW (1999)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,Third District.

Robert SPIVAK and Andrea Spivak, Appellants, v. Helen Treadwell SHAW, Appellee.

No. 98-1408

Decided: February 10, 1999

Before COPE, LEVY and SHEVIN, JJ.

Dean A. Mitchell, Miami, for appellants. Kubicki Draper and Angela C. Flowers, Miami, for appellee.

We affirm the judgment in the defendant's favor. Here, unlike the facts in Kao v. Lauredo, 617 So.2d 775, 777 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), there was no testimony that the rear end collision occurred because the accident happened “at a place and time where [a sudden stop] was reasonably expected ․ ” The defendant, who was driving the rear vehicle, presented evidence that dissipated the presumption of negligence, and the presumption became only a “permissible inference which the jury may or may not draw from the evidence before it.” Eppler v. Tarmac America, Inc., 695 So.2d 775, 777 (Fla. 1st DCA), review granted, 705 So.2d 8 (Fla. 1997).

Judgement affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network