Per Curiam.
The trial court erred by interpreting the judicially created rear-end presumption in vehicle collision cases to defeat Appellant's claim of comparative fault. Because there was admissible evidence that Appellant was not the sole cause of the accident, the presumption should have "vanishe[d] and los[t] its legal effect." Birge v. Charron...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
