Legal Opinion

Finkel v. Batista and Sanchez

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 5, 2016No. 3D15-2509PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLogue, J.

Evan Finkel and Julie Finkel, the defendants in the underlying lawsuit, appeal the order granting Yarielsi Batista and Rodney Sanchez, the plaintiffs, a new trial after the jury awarded the plaintiffs no damages. The trial court based its decision on the general rule that a plaintiff is entitled to recover at least the medical expenses incurred for any diagnostic testing reasonably necessary to determine whether an accident caused injury. See Sparks-Book v. Sports Authority, Inc., 699 So.2d 767, 768 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). We reverse because exceptions to this general rule apply, sufficient…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Brown v. Estate of StuckeySupreme Court of Florida · 1999
  2. Van v. SchmidtSupreme Court of Florida · 2013
  3. Plana v. SainzDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008
  4. Hernandez v. GonzalezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013
  5. Sparks-Book v. Sports Authority, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. FRED MEYERS AND NINIBETH MEYERS v. BONNEVA SHONTZDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
  2. CITY OF MIAMI v. CHARLES J. BENCOMO AND STACY BENCOMODistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2022
  3. DISCOUNT TIRE CO. vs TAMMY BRADFORD, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MICHAEL BLAZE BRADFORD, DECEASED; AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF WARREN MICHAEL BRADFORD, DECEASEDDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API