Lancheros v. Burke
In a rear-end/auto negligence case tried only on causation and damages, the trial court directed a verdict for the plaintiff on causation based on the defense orthopedic surgeon's concession that post-accident chiropractic treatment was related to the crash. The Sixth DCA reversed for a new trial, holding a jury remains free to disbelieve expert (and party) testimony and that directed verdicts in negligence cases are rarely appropriate.
Key facts
- Plaintiff sued defendant for injuries from a rear-end motor vehicle collision; trial proceeded on causation and damages only.
- Defense orthopedic surgeon testified that post-accident chiropractic treatment was related to the crash, and trial court directed a verdict for plaintiff on causation based on this concession.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Useful defense-side authority for resisting plaintiff motions for directed verdict on causation in personal injury trials, particularly where the defense expert concedes some accident-related treatment. The opinion… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.