Legal Opinion

Pollard v. Williams

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 25, 1993No. 92-03374PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BLUE, Judge.

In this appeal we are asked to determine under what circumstances a claimant seeking uninsured motorist benefits must prove permanency of injuries in order to recover dam*589ages for pain and suffering. Herschel N. Pollard, Jr. (Pollard) appeals the final judgment in an action brought to recover benefits under an uninsured motorist insurance policy issued by CNA Insurance Companies (CNA). Pollard contends the trial court erred because the jury was allowed to consider the question of permanency of his injuries in determining damages resulting from the subject accident. Pollard argues…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dauksis v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INS.Supreme Court of Florida · 1993
  2. Newton v. Auto-Owners Insurance Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
  3. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. DauksisDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. HassenDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  2. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. DixonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1999

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API