EDDIE FLEMING, APPELLANT,
v.
ELDRIDGE SMART, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the plaintiff was a nonpaying guest passenger under the Florida guest statute, and since gross negligence was not alleged, the summary judgment for the defendant was proper.
The plaintiff was a passenger in the defendant's car. While stopped to assist another motorist, the defendant started the car and backed into the plai…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Willful And Wanton Misconduct cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, plaintiff below, appeals an adverse final summary judgment. The question involved here is whether or not the appellant was a guest passenger within the purview of § 320.59, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.
The facts, which appear to be without •material conflict, are that the appellant and appellee were proceeding from a cafe, intending to ultimately attend a church sale. While en route, with the appellant driving the appellee’s car, they stopped to assist a ■motorist who had run out of gas. While attempting to refuel the disabled car, the appellant and appellee went to the rear of appellee’s automobile. However, the ap-pellee proceeded around to the driver’s side ■of his own automobile, entered, started it up, and, through some unexplained maneuver, caused it to back up, striking the appellant and breaking his legs.
The Florida guest statute § 320.59, supra, provides:
“No person transported by the owner or operator of a motor vehicle as his guest or passenger, without payment for such transportation, shall have a cause of action * * * unless such accident shall have been caused by the gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct of the owner or operator of such motor vehicle * * [Emphasis supplied.]
It is clear from the facts in this case that the appellant was a nonpaying guest and that the accident which resulted in his injuries occurred before the transportation was concluded. See Fishback v. Yale, Fla.1955, 85 So.2d 142. Consequently, since the appellant does not contend that the appellee was guilty of gross negligence, the summary judgment entered was proper.
Accordingly, the judgment appealed is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Goodson v. Lorey, 182 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)…o. 2d 331; Smith v. Tatum, 199 Va. 85, 97 S.E. 2d 820 (1957). . 8 Am.Jur.2d, Automobiles & Highway Traffic, § 482. . See: Kaplan v. Taub, Fla.App.1958, 104 So. 2d 882; LaRue v. Hoffman, Fla.App.1959, 109 So. 2d 373; Fleming v. Smart, Fla.App.1963, 153 So. 2d 748.…
-
Thomas v. Newsome, 211 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)…ther or not the defendant’s allegedly negligent act was performed in the course of carrying out the gratuitous undertaking that he had assumed. This rule has subsequently been applied in several factual settings. See Fleming v. Smart, Fla.App. 1963, 153 So. 2d 748; La Rue v. Hoffman, Fla.App.1959, 109 So. 2d 373; Kaplan v. Taub, Fla.App.1958, 104 So. 2d 882. It appears to us that the operation of hitching the trailer was an integral step in carrying out defendant’s gratuitous undertaking of providing round-t…
Authorities Cited
- Fishback v. Yale, 85 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 1955)