Case Name: Niazi Jorge FAROH, Jorge Faroh, Wilfred Faroh, Juan Daza, Appellants, v. Maricela MORALES, et al., Appellees; Maricela MORALES, Appellant, v. Jorge Elias Cano FAROH, et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1986-10-14
Citations: 497 So. 2d 669
Docket Number: Nos. 85-2763 and 86-155
Parties: Niazi Jorge FAROH, Jorge Faroh, Wilfred Faroh, Juan Daza, Appellants, v. Maricela MORALES, et al., Appellees. Maricela MORALES, Appellant, v. Jorge Elias Cano FAROH, et al., Appellees.
Judges: Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and JORGENSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 497
Pages: 669–669

Head Matter:
Niazi Jorge FAROH, Jorge Faroh, Wilfred Faroh, Juan Daza, Appellants, v. Maricela MORALES, et al., Appellees. Maricela MORALES, Appellant, v. Jorge Elias Cano FAROH, et al., Appellees.
Nos. 85-2763 and 86-155.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Oct. 14, 1986.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 9, 1986.
Charles M. Salas, Dennis G. King, Miami, for the Farohs and Daza.
Robbins & Reynolds and Marc Reynolds, Coral Gabels, for appellant Morales.
Parenti & Falk, P.A., Cooper, Wolfe & Bolotin, P.A., and Joan Bolotin, Miami, for appellee General Rent-A-Car, Inc.
Preddy, Kutner, Hardy, Rubinoff, Brown & Thompson and G. William Bissett, Miami, for appellee General Rent-A-Car, Inc.
Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and JORGENSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
These consolidated appeals and this cross-appeal arise from two connected automobile accidents involving three vehicles.
We affirm the final judgments entered against Niazi, Jorge, and Wilfred Faroh and Juan Daza [the Farohs] in favor of General Rent-A-Car, Inc., on the authority of Progressive American Insurance Co. v. McKinnie, 460 So.2d 389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), approved, 488 So.2d 825 (Fla.1986).
We also affirm the final judgment entered against Morales in favor of the Fa-rohs upon a finding that it was well within the discretion of the trial court to determine whether Morales should be allowed to recross-examine one of the Farohs' expert witnesses, and any error in this regard was at most harmless. See Wallace v. Rashkow, 270 So.2d 743, 745 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972).
Finally, we find that the other issues raised on cross-appeal by General Rent-A-Car are rendered moot by our affirmance in its favor.
Affirmed.