STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY vs DAVID C. KNAPP AND LOGAN K. ATKINSON
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D19-2219 DAVID C. KNAPP AND LOGAN K. ATKINSON, Appellees. ________________________________/ Opinion filed December 11, 2020 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County, James H. Earp, Judge. Warren B. Kwavnick and Kelly Lenahan, of Cooney Trybus Kwavnick Peets, PLC, Fort Lauderdale, for Appellant. Christopher V. Carlyle, of The Carlyle Appellate Law Firm, Orlando, and Andrew B. Pickett, of Andrew Pickett Law, PLLC, Melbourne, for Appellee David C. Knapp. No Appearance for Appellee Logan K. Atkinson. PER CURIAM. In this action for uninsured motorist benefits, State Farm Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”) appeals an adverse final judgment. We agree with State Farm that it was improper for plaintiff’s counsel to suggest to prospective jurors that empathy was a proper consideration in reaching a verdict. See, e.g., Joe v. State, 617 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (disapproving trial court’s instruction attempting to draw a distinction between sympathy and empathy). However, we conclude that the trial court’s denial of State Farm’s ensuing motion for mistrial was not an abuse of discretion. We affirm, without discussion, as to the other issues raised on appeal. AFFIRMED. EVANDER, C.J., LAMBERT and HARRIS, JJ., concur. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
