Case Name: Roque De La TORRE, Appellant, v. CRETE CARRIER CORPORATION, et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2001-05-30
Citations: 786 So. 2d 1202
Docket Number: No. 3D00-1417
Parties: Roque De La TORRE, Appellant, v. CRETE CARRIER CORPORATION, et al., Appellees.
Judges: Before LEVY, FLETCHER, and RAMIREZ, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 786
Pages: 1202–1203

Head Matter:
Roque De La TORRE, Appellant, v. CRETE CARRIER CORPORATION, et al., Appellees.
No. 3D00-1417.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
May 30, 2001.
Rehearing Denied July 11, 2001.
Sina Negahbani; and George Nachwal-ter, Miami, for appellant.
Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Strickroot, and Steven E. Stark, and June G. Hoffman, and Patti A. Meeks, Miami, for appellees.
Before LEVY, FLETCHER, and RAMIREZ, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Lipsig v. Ramlawi, 760 So.2d 170, 175 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)("A motion for directed verdict should not be granted unless the trial court, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, determines that no reasonable jury could render a verdict for the non-moving party."); Woods v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., 621 So.2d 710, 711 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Jacobs v. Westgate, 766 So.2d 1175, 1179 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (It is the function of the jury to weigh and evaluate the evidence.). In this case, there was conflicting evidence regarding skid marks which the jury could have resolved in favor of the defendant. Additionally, plaintiff testified that visibility was adequate and he could see where he was going. Thus, the jury could have concluded that he hit the truck because he was not paying attention.