Opinion
May 2, 1952.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County, F.R. Hocker, J.
W. Robert Smith, Ocala, for appellant.
Greene, Ayres Green, Ocala, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a final judgment in favor of the appellee for damages to a pulpwood truck which resulted from an accident between the pulpwood truck and a tractor-trailer of the appellant.
The appellant filed defenses of the general issue and contributory negligence and also a counter-claim.
By stipulation between the parties the cause was tried before the Circuit Judge without a jury. At the conclusion of all of the testimony, the court rendered an opinion, reading in part as follows:
"It is my opinion that the cause of this accident was the fact that the defendants driver decided to turn across the road at a point where following traffic had no reason to suppose he would do so. Further that in making this turn the driver admittedly could not see to his rear in his rear view mirror and did not look back. If he had had adequate rear vision he would have known that plaintiff's truck was in the act of passing him and a slight turn to the right by defendants truck would have avoided the accident.
"I think plaintiff is entitled to recover * * *."
Thereafter final judgment was entered in favor of the appellee in the sum of $1,865.60.
The appellant filed a motion for new trial upon the usual grounds, that the verdict was contrary to the evidence and contrary to the weight of the evidence, which was denied.
In addition to the question of negligence and contributory negligence raised by the pleadings, in the brief filed by the appellant, there is discussed the doctrine of "Last Clear Chance". There was some slight conflict in the evidence but the trial Judge has resolved any such conflict in favor of the appellee. There was sufficient substantial evidence for the trial Judge to find that the appellant was guilty of negligence which caused the accident and damages and that appellee was not guilty of contributory negligence. We do not find that the record justifies the application of the doctrine of "Last Clear Chance".
The finding and judgment of the trial court is presumed to be correct and there is nothing in the record to overcome that presumption. His findings are entitled to the same weight as that of a verdict by a jury. Findings of fact by the jury, or the court below, will be sustained on appeal unless there is no substantial evidence to support them. Laramore v. Laramore, Fla., 49 So.2d 517; Smith v. Biscayne Park Estates, Fla., 42 So.2d 442; Hall v. Adams, 155 Fla. 1, 19 So.2d 412; Wilson v. T.A. Monk, Inc., 140 Fla. 797, 192 So. 407; Jernigan v. Harrison, 136 Fla. 320, 186 So. 511.
Affirmed.
SEBRING, C.J., and CHAPMAN, J., and TAYLOR, Associate Justice, concur.