Legal Opinion

Oasis v. Espinoza

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 21, 2007No. 3D06-569PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROTHENBERG, Judge.

The plaintiff, Russell Oasis, appeals from an order denying his motion for attorney’s fees and costs. We affirm.

Alberto J. Espinoza (“Espinoza”) struck the rear end of the plaintiffs vehicle while driving a delivery truck owned by Amaro Food Enterprises, Inc. (“Amaro Food”). Count I of the plaintiffs second amended complaint sought judgment against Amaro Food and Espinoza jointly and severally, alleging that Amaro Food “negligently entrusted, and/or maintained” its truck, and that Espinoza “negligently operated and/or maintained” Amaro Food’s truck. Counts II and III were…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Willis Shaw Express, Inc. v. Hilyer Sod, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 2003
  2. Lamb v. MatetzschkSupreme Court of Florida · 2005
  3. Papouras v. BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONSDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Michele K. Feinzig, P.A. v. Deehl & Carlson, P.A.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2015
  2. Manuel Diaz Farms, Inc. v. DelgadoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016
  3. Joseph v. NiosiDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API