Dangerous Instrumentality Doctrine

506 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Kraemer v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp.
  572 So. 2d 1363· Fla.· 1990-12-20 ·cited 553×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a long-term automobile lessor remains liable under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine for injuries caused by the negligent operation of a leased vehicle, even when the lessee has beneficial use and control, unless the statutory exception in
• West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., Inc.
  336 So. 2d 80· Fla.· 1976-07-21 ·cited 444×
  Florida Supreme Court adopts the doctrine of strict liability in tort for defective products, extending liability to both users and foreseeable bystanders. The court holds that contributory negligence is not a defense when based on failure to discover defects, but ordinary lack o
• S. Cotton Oil Co. v. Anderson
  80 Fla. 441· Fla.· 1920-06-30 ·cited 318×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a judgment for $7,500 against Southern Cotton Oil Company for injuries caused by negligent operation of the company's automobile. The case establishes that automobiles, when operated on public highways, are dangerous instrumentalities making own
• Mercury Motors Express, Inc. v. Smith
  393 So. 2d 545· Fla.· 1981-01-22 ·cited 264×
  Mercury Motors Express appealed a jury verdict awarding $250,000 in punitive damages following a death caused by its employee's reckless driving under the influence. The Florida Supreme Court held that an employer cannot be held vicariously liable for punitive damages under respo
• Slavin v. Sanford KAY
  108 So. 2d 462· Fla.· 1958-04-16 ·cited 202×
  A motel guest sued the motel operator and plumbing contractor after a wash basin fell from the wall and injured him. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed directed verdicts for both defendants, holding that contractors are not liable to third parties for negligence after their work
• Vining v. AVIS Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc.
  354 So. 2d 54· Fla.· 1977-11-10 ·cited 161×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the dismissal of a complaint against Avis for injuries caused when a stolen rental car was negligently operated by a thief. The court held that whether a car owner's negligent failure to secure a vehicle constitutes the proximate cause of injuri
• Anderson v. S. Cotton Oil Co.
  73 Fla. 432· Fla.· 1917-02-23 ·cited 160×
  In this 1917 negligence case, the Florida Supreme Court reversed a directed verdict for a corporate defendant in an automobile accident case, holding that the employer's liability for an employee's negligent driving while using the company car with the employer's acquiescence is
• Kaufman v. The City of Tallahassee
  84 Fla. 634· Fla.· 1922-12-01 ·cited 145×
  Kaufman sued the City of Tallahassee for injuries caused by a dangerously designed fire truck trailer that swept across sidewalks when turning corners. The Florida Supreme Court reversed a demurrer sustaining judgment for the City, holding that municipalities operating under the
• Susco CAR Rental Sys. OF Fla. v. Leonard
  112 So. 2d 832· Fla.· 1959-05-08 ·cited 143×
  Susco Car Rental System sued for damages arising from an accident involving a rental car driven by an unauthorized third party. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed that a car rental company cannot escape liability for injuries caused by operation of a dangerous instrumentality (mo
• Nelson v. Ziegler
  89 So. 2d 780· Fla.· 1956-07-18 ·cited 131×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a directed verdict in a negligence case, holding that the question of whether the defendant driver could have avoided injuring the plaintiff pedestrian was a matter for the jury to decide, not the judge. The court emphasized that even if the pla
• Finney P. Lynch v. Walker
  159 Fla. 188· Fla.· 1947-06-24 ·cited 130×
  In this automobile negligence case, the Florida Supreme Court held that a bailor-owner of an automobile for hire is liable for injuries caused by the negligent operation of the vehicle by a bailee, even without a master-servant relationship. The court overruled prior precedent li
• Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Price
  170 So. 2d 293· Fla.· 1964-12-21 ·cited 122×
  Florida Power and Light Company challenged a District Court of Appeal decision that reversed a Circuit Court dismissal and imposed liability on the power company under the dangerous instrumentality and inherently dangerous work doctrines for injuries to an independent contractor'
• Crenshaw Bros. Produce Co., Inc. v. Harper
  142 Fla. 27· Fla.· 1940-02-23 ·cited 115×
  The Florida Supreme Court consolidated two tort cases arising from a single incident where a truck driver negligently operated a motor truck into a railroad crossing, injuring a 19-year-old student helper. The Court affirmed judgments for the plaintiffs, holding that the truck dr
• Ga. S. & Fla. Ry. Co. v. Seven-Up Bottling Co. OF Se. Ga., Inc.
  175 So. 2d 39· Fla.· 1965-05-12 ·cited 96×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Section 768.06, a comparative negligence statute applying exclusively to railroads, violated the Equal Protection Clause because changed conditions—particularly the rise of motor vehicles as dangerous instrumentalities—made the statute arbitrar
• Orefice v. Albert
  237 So. 2d 142· Fla.· 1970-07-01 ·cited 94×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that an airplane is a dangerous instrumentality under Florida law, and the non-negligent co-owner of such an instrumentality may be held vicariously liable for negligent operation by another co-owner. The Court reversed the dismissal of the minor vi
• Weber v. Porco
  100 So. 2d 146· Fla.· 1958-01-29 ·cited 94×
  This case addresses whether a wife who owns an automobile is bound by the contributory negligence of her husband while driving it, and whether genuine factual disputes about an intersection collision preclude summary judgment. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's
• Holstun & Son v. Embry
  124 Fla. 554· Fla.· 1936-03-25 ·cited 94×
  In this wrongful death action brought by a minor child for the death of his father, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed a jury verdict holding the employer liable for supplying a defective motor truck (with steering gear and axle defects) to an employee-driver who was killed when
• Lamb v. Matetzschk
  906 So. 2d 1037· Fla.· 2005-06-23 ·cited 93×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442(c)(3) requires that settlement proposals made to multiple defendants must differentiate the amount and terms attributable to each defendant, even when one defendant's liability is purely vicarious. The Court approv
• Ingram v. Pettit
  340 So. 2d 922· Fla.· 1976-12-09 ·cited 88×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed whether a jury should consider punitive damages when negligence is coupled with intoxication, specifically in a rear-end collision case.
• Ins. Co. OF N. Am. v. AVIS Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc.
  348 So. 2d 1149· Fla.· 1977-05-12 ·cited 87×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a vehicle lessor (Avis) and its insurer (Liberty Mutual) may recover indemnification from a lessee's employer (Camp Ocala) and its insurer (INA) for liability losses exceeding the primary coverage limits specified in the rental agreement, provi
• Aurbach v. Gallina
  753 So. 2d 60· Fla.· 2000-02-03 ·cited 86×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the dangerous instrumentality doctrine does not extend to hold a parent vicariously liable for a child's negligent operation of a motor vehicle merely because the parent purchased the vehicle, paid for its maintenance, and had a general parenta
• Koger v. Hollahan
  144 Fla. 779· Fla.· 1940-11-19 ·cited 83×
  The Florida Supreme Court addressed whether a car owner can be liable to a guest of the vehicle's driver for gross negligence under the state's 1937 guest statute. The court held that the statute only raises the negligence threshold for guest claims from ordinary to gross neglige
• Carter v. Hector Supply Co.
  128 So. 2d 390· Fla.· 1961-03-22 ·cited 78×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a retailer is not liable to a non-purchaser employee for breach of an implied warranty of fitness for a non-inherently dangerous product, absent privity of contract. While disagreeing with the Court of Appeal's reasoning, the Court affirmed the
• Engleman v. Traeger
  102 Fla. 756· Fla.· 1931-08-06 ·cited 76×
  This case addresses the liability of automobile owners when they permit others to use their vehicles on public highways. The Florida Supreme Court held that an owner remains legally responsible for negligent operation by anyone using the car with the owner's knowledge and consent
• AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Huntington Nat'l Bank
  609 So. 2d 1315· Fla.· 1992-12-17 ·cited 74×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that section 324.021(9)(b) exempts lessors from liability under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine for any motor vehicle lease lasting one year or longer with adequate insurance, regardless of whether the lease is a financing substitute. The cou
• MAY v. Palm Beach Chem. Co., Inc.
  77 So. 2d 468· Fla.· 1955-01-21 ·cited 69×
  Katherine May sued Palm Beach Chemical Company for injuries sustained when her husband, an employee, negligently operated the company's automobile while on a personal errand. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's dismissal, holding that an employer remains liable u
• Roth v. OLD Republic Ins. Co. & N. River Ins. Co.
  269 So. 2d 3· Fla.· 1972-05-03 ·cited 66×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that an unauthorized driver of a rental car is covered under the rental agency's liability insurance policy despite contractual restrictions prohibiting such use. The court resolved a conflict with lower court precedent by applying the dangerous ins
• ADY v. Am. Honda Fin. Corp.
  675 So. 2d 577· Fla.· 1996-03-21 ·cited 65×
  A lessor cannot receive the statutory exemption from liability under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine unless the lessee itself obtains and maintains effective insurance in the amounts required by Florida Statute § 324.021(9)(b); insurance obtained by the lessor does not sat
• Reynolds v. Allstate Ins. Co.
  400 So. 2d 496· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-05-27 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the allegations in the complaint were insufficient to establish that the insured's injuries arose out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of his motor vehicle.
• City of Tampa v. Easton
  145 Fla. 188· Fla.· 1940-11-26 ·cited 63×
  City of Tampa appeals a judgment awarding damages for injuries caused by negligent operation of the city's motor truck. The Florida Supreme Court affirms, holding that a municipality is liable for negligence in operating a dangerous instrumentality (motor vehicle) on its streets
• Bellere v. Einar Madsen
  114 So. 2d 619· Fla.· 1959-09-16 ·cited 62×
  A defendant is not entitled to a sudden emergency instruction if their own negligence created or contributed to the emergency.
• Chrysler Corp. v. Wolmer
  499 So. 2d 823· Fla.· 1986-11-26 ·cited 61×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that punitive damages in a wrongful death products liability case require proof of conduct equivalent to manslaughter—reckless disregard for human life—not merely knowledge of a design defect and continued marketing. The Court reversed the district
• Castillo v. Bickley
  363 So. 2d 792· Fla.· 1978-09-28 ·cited 59×
  A motor vehicle owner is not liable for injuries caused by the negligence of a repairman or serviceman with whom the vehicle has been left, provided the owner does not exercise control over the injury-causing operation during servicing, service-related testing, or transport, and
• The HERTZ Corp. v. Jackson
  617 So. 2d 1051· Fla.· 1993-04-01 ·cited 57×
  Hertz Corporation rented a vehicle to individuals using fraud and a stolen credit card. After the vehicle was never returned and later involved in an accident injuring Billy Jackson, Hertz was sued. The Florida Supreme Court held that the dangerous instrumentality doctrine does n
• Freddy R. Smith v. Ryder Truck Rentals, Inc.
  182 So. 2d 422· Fla.· 1966-02-16 ·cited 57×
  Smith, an employee injured by a fellow employee's negligence while operating a leased motorcycle, sought to recover from the equipment lessor Ryder Truck Rentals under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine. The Florida Supreme Court held that the lessor is not liable because the
• Cockerham v. R. E. Vaughan, Inc.
  82 So. 2d 890· Fla.· 1955-09-23 ·cited 57×
  A 2.5-year-old child was injured when he fell into an uncovered 6x8x6 foot hole dug by a contractor to install a septic tank. The Florida Supreme Court reversed summary judgment for the contractor, holding that a contractor creating a dangerous condition on another's land owes th
• Almond H. Thomas and Irene Thomas v. Atl. Assocs., Inc.
  226 So. 2d 100· Fla.· 1969-07-30 ·cited 56×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a summary judgment in a negligent entrustment case, holding that there are genuine issues of material fact regarding whether a thirteen-year-old daughter's unauthorized use of a car constituted conversion or theft, and whether the father was neg
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Fowler
  480 So. 2d 1287· Fla.· 1985-11-27 ·cited 54×
  This Florida Supreme Court case addresses the priority of insurance coverage when a vehicle owner is vicariously liable under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine for an accident caused by the vehicle's driver. The Court held that an insurer of a vicariously liable party must f
• Raydel, Ltd. v. Medcalfe
  178 So. 2d 569· Fla.· 1965-07-07 ·cited 53×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment against vehicle owners under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine, holding that an owner is not liable to an employee-bailee or spouse for injuries caused by negligent operation of a vehicle jointly entrusted to them for personal us
• Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. v. Douglas
  654 So. 2d 118· Fla.· 1995-03-09 ·cited 51×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that an insurer must strictly comply with statutory notice and disclosure requirements to validly limit uninsured motorist coverage under section 627.727(9)(d). Because GEICO failed to comply with these requirements, Douglas retained full uninsured
• Rethell Byrd Chandler v. GEICO Indem. Co.
  78 So. 3d 1293· Fla.· 2011-11-23 ·cited 50×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the First District's decision denying insurance coverage for a rental car accident, holding that an insurer cannot rely on unauthorized driver clauses in rental agreements to defeat coverage under Florida's dangerous instrumentality doctrine. Th
• Lingefelt v. Hanner
  125 So. 2d 325· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-12-22 ·cited 50×
  The negligent failure to lock an automobile's ignition does not constitute the proximate cause of injuries resulting from a third party's unauthorized and negligent operation of that vehicle, as the intervening criminal or malicious act breaks the chain of causation.
• Foremost Dairies, Inc. v. Godwin
  158 Fla. 245· Fla.· 1946-08-02 ·cited 50×
  Foremost Dairies appealed a judgment for damages in an automobile collision caused by its employee Howell. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that the corporation could not be held liable because Howell had not yet begun his employment duties when the collision occurred,
• Vargas v. Enter. Leasing Co.
  993 So. 2d 614· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-10-31 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the Graves Amendment (49 U.S.C. § 30106) preempts Florida's vicarious liability statute for short-term motor vehicle lessors (section 324.021(9)(b)2), rejecting the argument that the statute qualifies as a 'financial responsibility law' exempt from federal pre
• Demshar v. AAACon Auto Transp., Inc.
  337 So. 2d 963· Fla.· 1976-09-23 ·cited 49×
  The court held that transporting automobiles does not fall within the definition of 'automobile business' as specifically defined in the insurance policy's exclusion clause, and that the owner's insurer provided primary coverage.
• The HERTZ Corp. v. Hellens
  140 So. 2d 73· Fla. 2d DCA· 1962-04-11 ·cited 49×
  A covenant not to sue one tort-feasor does not release other tort-feasors, including vicarious ones, and the settlement amount must be set off against any judgment against the remaining tort-feasors.
• DelLouise Greene v. Jas. T. Miller and wife
  102 Fla. 767· Fla.· 1931-08-06 ·cited 49×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for defendants in a negligence case where the plaintiff was injured as a guest in an automobile negligently operated by an adult son with the owner's knowledge and consent. The court held that automobile owners are liable for negligen
• Royal G. RAY & Morrison Assurance Co. v. Earl
  277 So. 2d 73· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-04-25 ·cited 47×
  The court held that Earl, a bailee who allowed a third party to drive the owner's car and was injured as a passenger, remains an insured under the car owner's liability policy and therefore cannot be sued by the owner's insurer for indemnity. This case addresses the scope of omni
• Anthony v. Schmitt
  557 So. 2d 656· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-02-28 ·cited 44×
  Paul Anthony appealed the dismissal of his wrongful death action arising from his wife's death in a 1979 automobile accident. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed the dismissal, holding that discovery activity filed by plaintiff's counsel constituted sufficient re
• Jacinto Abdala v. World Omni Leasing, Inc.
  583 So. 2d 330· Fla.· 1991-06-27 ·cited 43×
  The court held that subsection 324.021(9)(b), Florida Statutes, is constitutional and does not violate access to courts, equal protection, or due process rights.