# Public Health Foundation for Cancer & Blood Pressure Research, Inc. v. Cole

> District Court of Appeal of Florida · November 9, 1977 · 352 So. 2d 877

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7487437

## Case

- **Full name:** PUBLIC HEALTH FOUNDATION FOR CANCER AND BLOOD PRESSURE RESEARCH, INC., Public Health Properties Corporation, Auto Owners Insurance Company and Westchester Fire Insurance Company v. Charlotte W. COLE
- **Court:** District Court of Appeal of Florida
- **Decided:** November 9, 1977
- **Citations:** 352 So. 2d 877; 1977 Fla. App. LEXIS 16732
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Parham
- **Judges:** Alderman, Downey, Parham
- **Cited by:** 7 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7487437

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting expert testimony about “the deceptive quality of various factors that were present in the environment and the manner in which a person would react to these factors” because it created a situation beyond the ordin…

## Opinion text

PARHAM, Associate Judge,
dissenting:
I must respectfully dissent from the majority opinion. Specifically, I agree with all of the concurring opinion of Judge James Downey, including his conclusion that allowing Dr. Scherer’s testimony as described could not be held as harmless error. However, I depart as to following the precedent in Hill. The decision in Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company v. Hill, 250 So.2d 311 (Fla.4th DCA 1971) is such a departure from precedent that it should not be followed. It is bad law and should be set aside.
The Defendant in this case was entitled to have the Plaintiff’s wrongdoing, her contributory or comparative negligence evaluated without the taint of the opinion of this self-styled “human engineer”.
For the above reasons I do respectfully dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7487437. Public record. Not legal advice.