Court Opinion

ID: 9778632
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 21:14:14.98293+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:33:12.247199
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
PER CURIAM.
Appellees’ motion for rehearing indicates they are under the impression that the original opinion herein is concurred in by a majority of this court. The record does not so reflect. The court is unanimous in its conclusion that the trial court was in error in its failure to include in its definition of “proximate cause” the term, “new and independent cause.” The majority agreed with the trial court’s disposition of the other questions discussed in the concurring opinion, as shown by the statement in the opinion of one of our justices that: “I concur in the concurring opinion.” A discussion of the questions in the concurring opinion was for the purpose of furnishing a guide to the view of the majority on the questions discussed in the event of another trial.