From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pearson v. Royal Caribbean Cruises

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jan 12, 2000
751 So. 2d 125 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Summary

affirming the order under review by relying on the above quoted statement from Clements

Summary of this case from Vila v. Philip Morris USA Inc.

Opinion

No. 3D98-2773.

Opinion filed January 12, 2000.

An appeal from the Circuit Court of Dade County, Lawrence A. Schwartz, Judge, L.T. No. 95-18079.

Stuart H. Share and Mark T. Packo, for appellant.

Hicks Anderson and Mark Hicks and Dinah S. Stein; Canning Murray, for appellee.

Before JORGENSON, COPE, and FLETCHER, JJ.


Affirmed. See Clement v. Rousselle Corp., 372 So.2d 1156, 1158 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) ("A defendant who has answered with a general denial, is entitled to prove, and to argue to the jury, that the accident was due solely to the negligence of a person not party to the suit."), cert. denied, 383 So.2d 1191 (Fla. 1980).


Summaries of

Pearson v. Royal Caribbean Cruises

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jan 12, 2000
751 So. 2d 125 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

affirming the order under review by relying on the above quoted statement from Clements

Summary of this case from Vila v. Philip Morris USA Inc.
Case details for

Pearson v. Royal Caribbean Cruises

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM PEARSON Appellant, vs. ROYAL CARIBBEAN CRUISES, LTD., Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jan 12, 2000

Citations

751 So. 2d 125 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Vila v. Philip Morris USA Inc.

To present an "empty chair" defense, the defendant need only answer the complaint with a general denial and…

Dover v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

See Nash, 678 So. 2d at 1264. See Pearson v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., 751 So. 2d 125, 126 (Fla. 3d DCA…