Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0244 1. this issue because no matter what his status, there is no indi- cation that any negligence of these defendants was the proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries. A similar situation was presented in Pie v. Cruise Boat Co., Inc., 380 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), where the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a summary 3udgment based on an absence of proximate-cause where the plaintiff entered a highway from an' obstructed shoulder area. We believe this case is governed by the same principle as applied in the Pope decis~an and the stmimary judgment is therefore affirmed. AFFIRMED. . I I 19~ .lllri 16 A!I $ 56 I F EO END ~EC~tp~Q ' S~LIlC{E COUN~Y.F``A ~tO6Elt POITRAS CLERK CIRCtKT REC~R~ YERIFIFO. • OJ 4 i ANSTEAD, J., and SIMONS, STUART M., Associate Judge, concur. i -3- i so~3~3 244 .