Dangerous Instrumentality Doctrine

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

• Moessinger v. Johnson
  292 So. 2d 606· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-02-20 ·cited 6×
  A bailor is not liable for injuries to a third party caused by the bailee's negligence in using the bailed property, unless the bailor was guilty of independent negligence proximately contributing to the injury.
• Langill v. James Columbia & the Wackenhut Corp.
  289 So. 2d 460· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-01-22 ·cited 6×
  Plaintiff was shot and injured by a security guard employed by Wackenhut Corporation. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Wackenhut, but the appellate court reversed, finding genuine issues of fact regarding whether Wackenhut negligently entrusted a firearm to an
• Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Sentry Ins. Co.
  288 So. 2d 556· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-01-16 ·cited 6×
  Liberty Mutual appeals a judgment dismissing its third-party claim against Hardware Mutual for concurrent insurance coverage following a tractor-trailer accident. The court reversed, holding that Hardware's policy provided coverage for the driver under the omnibus clause despite
• Waldron v. Kirkland
  281 So. 2d 70· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-07-25 ·cited 6×
  This case addresses whether a vehicle owner can be held vicariously liable for punitive damages under Florida's dangerous instrumentality doctrine when the owner had no knowledge of the driver's propensity to consume alcohol. The court held that while owners are vicariously liabl
• Roth v. Cannel
  242 So. 2d 491· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-12-29 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed judgments and orders in consolidated appeals arising from automobile negligence suits, concerning indemnification and insurance coverage for a minor driver of a rented automobile.
• Gen. Portland Cement Co. v. Walker
  293 F.2d 294· 5th Cir.· 1961-07-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial judge properly submitted the issue of contributory negligence to the jury, as reasonable minds could differ on whether the decedent's actions were negligent under the circumstances.
• Blanford v. Frederic Russell Nourse and William Edward Lambert
  120 So. 2d 830· Fla. 3d DCA· 1960-05-26 ·cited 6×
  Plaintiff Blanford was injured when struck by an automobile owned by Nourse and being driven by Highway Patrol officer Lambert after a minor traffic accident. The trial court directed a verdict for the defendants, and Blanford appealed, arguing that Lambert was driving with Nours
• Chase & Co. v. Benefield
  64 So. 2d 922· Fla.· 1953-05-05 ·cited 6×
  This personal injury action involved an appeal from a final judgment where the appellant argued procedural errors regarding the complaint's identification of the driver and failure to prove ownership.
• Rautbord v. Ehmann
  190 F.2d 533· 7th Cir.· 1951-06-22 ·cited 6×
  The owner of a boat is entitled to limitation of liability for an accident caused by his minor son's negligence if the owner was not personally at fault or lacked knowledge of the circumstances, especially when the son was experienced and trained.
• Ry. Express Agency, Inc. v. COX
  179 F.2d 593· 5th Cir.· 1950-01-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible error by failing to instruct the jury to determine whether the defendant's alleged omissions constituted negligence and proximately caused the injury.
• Murray v. Pasotex Pipe Line Co.
  161 F.2d 5· 5th Cir.· 1947-04-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that sufficient evidence existed to submit the question of the employer's liability to the jury based on entrusting a vehicle to a known incompetent driver.
• Detroit Edison Co. v. Ewing
  122 F.2d 852· 6th Cir.· 1941-10-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its instructions or rulings.
• Stewart v. The Standard Fire Ins. Co.
  423 F. Supp. 3d 1354· M.D. Fla.· 2025-12-22 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a bad faith claim under Fla. Stat. § 624.155 is premature and must be dismissed without prejudice due to Article III's case or controversy requirement.
• City of Miami v. LYN M. Robinson
  364 So. 3d 1087· Fla. 3d DCA· 2023-05-31 ·cited 5×
  Sovereign immunity bars tort liability where an employee acts outside the course and scope of employment; the "going and coming" rule applies when an employee is traveling to work, and a plaintiff bears the burden of presenting evidence creating a genuine factual dispute regardin
• Ryder TRS, Inc. v. Hirsch
  900 So. 2d 608· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-03-02 ·cited 5×
  A jury instruction on conversion need not be taken verbatim from appellate opinions; an instruction is not misleading or erroneous merely because it uses imprecise language, provided the instruction viewed as a whole fairly states the applicable law and does not result in a misca
• Gomez v. AVIS Rent A CAR Sys., Inc.
  596 So. 2d 510· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-03-31 ·cited 5×
  The Gomez children appealed the dismissal of derivative damages claims against the owners of a rental car involved in an accident that injured their mother. The court reversed, holding that Florida Statute 768.0415 permits minor children to recover derivative damages against both
• Roger Lambert Ad Litem for Carol A. Hoffler v. Indian River Elec., Inc.
  551 So. 2d 518· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-08-23 ·cited 5×
  The court reversed summary judgment in a negligence action brought by a guardian ad litem on behalf of an injured passenger against a vehicle owner, holding that interspousal immunity is not available as a defense to a non-spouse owner under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine
• Roberts v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co. & J. Glover Wilkins, Jr.
  498 So. 2d 1037· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-12-16 ·cited 5×
  Roberts appeals from a directed verdict in an auto injury case, arguing that the vehicle owner Wilkins and his insurer USF & G should be liable under Florida's dangerous instrumentality doctrine for injuries caused when a service station repairman, without authorization, drove th
• Executive CAR & Truck Leasing, Inc. v. Alberta DeSERIO
  470 So. 2d 21· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-05-01 ·cited 5×
  In this insurance coverage dispute arising from an automobile accident with $1.2 million in damages, the court determined the priority order among three insurers covering the vehicle owner/lessor, lessee, and negligent driver. The court held that the owner's insurer must provide
• John K. Vreeland ad Litem for the Estate of Jose Martinez v. Ferrer
  28 So. 3d 906· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-01-06 ·cited 4×
  This wrongful death case addresses whether a federal statute preempts Florida's dangerous instrumentality doctrine to shield aircraft owners/lessors from vicarious liability when they do not possess or control the aircraft at the time of negligent operation. The court held that 4
• Karling v. Budget Rent A CAR Sys., Inc.
  2 So. 3d 354· Fla. 5th DCA· 2008-12-05 ·cited 4×
  Karling appeals a summary judgment dismissing his vicarious liability claim against a car rental company under Florida's dangerous instrumentality doctrine. The court affirmed, holding that the federal Graves Amendment preempts state law imposing strict vicarious liability on veh
• Dupuis v. Vanguard Car Rental USA, Inc.
  510 F. Supp. 2d 980· M.D. Fla.· 2007-09-24 ·cited 4×
  The Graves Amendment preempts Florida's vicarious liability scheme for motor vehicle lessors, and the Amendment is a constitutional exercise of Congress's Commerce Clause power.
• Rocio Garcia v. City OF Hollywood
  966 So. 2d 5· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-06-06 ·cited 4×
  Rocío Garcia, a minor injured when struck by a police vehicle, sued the City of Hollywood for damages. The court affirmed summary judgment for the City, holding that the police officer who struck Garcia was not acting within the scope of his employment when driving to the station
• Carrasquero v. Ethan's Auto Express, Inc.
  949 So. 2d 223· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-12-20 ·cited 4×
  In this negligence case arising from a vehicle accident, the trial court granted a directed verdict for Ethan's Auto Express, Inc., finding it was not the beneficial owner of the vehicle despite holding record title, and therefore not liable under the dangerous instrumentality do
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. & Eric Peck v. Austin Outdoor Inc.
  918 So. 2d 446· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-01-25 ·cited 4×
  State Farm and Eric Peck appealed a summary judgment granted in favor of Austin Outdoor and OneSource Landscape in a motor vehicle injury case. The core issue was whether the vehicle's driver had the defendants' knowledge and consent or was a thief, which would determine liabilit
• Davis v. Bruhaspati, Inc.
  917 So. 2d 350· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-12-29 ·cited 4×
  William Davis's estate appealed summary judgment dismissing a wrongful death action against Gregory Carter and his father Cleatous Carter after Gregory stole gas, fled pursuing gas station employees, and was involved in a chain-reaction collision that injured and ultimately led t
• Hoffman v. Helene Ouellette
  798 So. 2d 42· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-10-17 ·cited 4×
  Douglas Hoffman, as representative of the estate of Raymond Coutellier, appealed a jury verdict awarding damages to Helene Ouellette for injuries sustained in an automobile accident at a mobile home park in Florida. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, holding that Florida
• Lennox Griffith v. Budget Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc.
  692 So. 2d 294· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-04-30 ·cited 4×
  Griffith appeals a summary judgment granting workers' compensation immunity to Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc. for injuries sustained in an automobile accident while Griffith was traveling with his supervisor after a business convention. The court affirmed, holding that under Flo
• Nixon v. Halpin
  620 So. 2d 796· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-06-23 ·cited 4×
  A secured party cannot delegate its non-delegable duty to repossess collateral without a breach of the peace to an independent contractor and avoid liability for injuries caused during the repossession attempt.
• Fought v. Mullen
  609 So. 2d 726· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-12-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the automobile service exception to the dangerous instrumentality doctrine applies to automobile auctions, barring owner liability for injuries during service-related transport.
• Transp. Int'l Pool, Inc. v. PAT Salmon & Sons OF Fla., Inc.
  609 So. 2d 658· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-11-18 ·cited 4×
  Transport International Pool, Inc. (TIP), a trailer lessor, sought indemnification from Pat Salmon & Sons of Florida, Inc., after settling an injury claim where it was determined TIP had no legal liability. The Fourth District reversed summary judgment against TIP, holding that w
• Trevisol v. Ford Motor Credit Co.
  583 So. 2d 703· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-06-26 ·cited 4×
• Mirabal v. Cachurra Corp.
  580 So. 2d 285· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-05-21 ·cited 4×
  In this workers' compensation immunity case, the court affirmed summary judgment for defendants in a wrongful death action arising from an employee's electrocution during construction work. The court held that neither the employer nor coemployee lost statutory immunity, as their
• Hanley v. Forester
  903 F.2d 1030· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Florida law, not Mississippi law, should apply to the case because Florida has a more significant relationship to the accident and a stronger policy interest in highway safety. The district court erred in applying Mississippi law.
• Henry v. Merck & Co., Inc.
  877 F.2d 1489· 10th Cir.· 1989-07-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant owed no duty to the plaintiff to prevent a third party's criminal acts, and that the third party's criminal acts constituted a supervening cause, relieving the defendant of liability.
• Secundino Barcelo Cocio v. Bramlett
  872 F.2d 889· 9th Cir.· 1989-04-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that imposing a life sentence without parole for twenty-five years for a felon on probation who commits manslaughter while driving under the influence is constitutionally proportionate.
• Shedrick Almon v. Enter. Leasing Co.
  537 So. 2d 1046· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-01-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the circumstances presented a jury question as to whether the appellant had terminated his status as a bailee, precluding summary judgment.
• Dick Courteau's GMC Truck Co. & Universal Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Santo Comancho-Colon
  498 So. 2d 1023· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-12-12 ·cited 4×
  Motor vehicle dealers loaned vehicles to drivers who were involved in accidents; the dealers were joined as defendants under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine and sought indemnification from the drivers and their insurers. The court held that the drivers were not insureds un
• Chicago Ins. Co. v. Veronique Soucy
  473 So. 2d 683· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-11-28 ·cited 4×
  This case involves an appeal by an excess liability insurer challenging a trial court's order determining the priority of coverage among multiple insurers for defendants in a personal injury suit arising from an automobile accident.
• Proprietors Ins. Co. v. West
  435 So. 2d 290· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-06-28 ·cited 4×
  Under Florida's adoption of the Restatement (Second) significant relationships test, the law of the state with the most significant relationship to a tort action, not necessarily the place of injury, determines rights and liabilities. When the place of injury is merely fortuitous
• Aidee Lopez v. DeMARIA Porche-Audi
  395 So. 2d 199· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-02-17 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Third District Court of Appeal reversed a directed verdict for a vehicle owner in a negligent entrustment case, holding that an owner who entrusts a vehicle to a serviceman for repair, knowing the serviceman will use it for personal transportation, remains vicariously
• Kobetitsch v. Am. Mfrs'. Mut. Ins. Co.
  390 So. 2d 76· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-10-14 ·cited 4×
  Kobetitsch seeks uninsured motorist benefits under his employer's insurance policy after being injured by an uninsured driver. The court reversed summary judgment for the insurer, holding that whether the employee's use of the employer's van was within the scope of permission pre
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. DAY CAR, Inc.
  395 So. 2d 179· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-06-17 ·cited 4×
  State Farm and American Hardware disputed which company provided primary insurance coverage for a rental car accident. The trial court held State Farm liable, but the appellate court reversed, finding that American Hardware's equipment dealers' policy provided primary coverage up
• Langston v. The Pers. Serv. Ins. Co. & George Johnson, Jr.
  377 So. 2d 993· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-11-21 ·cited 4×
  Langston, injured as a passenger in a vehicle operated by Fred Johnson and owned by George Johnson, Jr., appeals a summary judgment dismissing his claims against the vehicle owner and the surety bond company. The court reverses, holding that under Florida tort law, the owner can
• Booker v. Okaloosa Bd. OF Pub. Instruction
  323 So. 2d 619· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-12-23 ·cited 4×
  A school board may be held liable for negligence by its employee-faculty supervisor in permitting students to ride in the back of a pickup truck, but only if the faculty supervisor's conduct was a legal cause of the accident; summary judgment is inappropriate where disputed factu
• Marrillia v. LYN Craft Boat Co.
  271 So. 2d 204· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-01-05 ·cited 4×
  Ronald Marrillia appealed the dismissal of his complaint against a boat manufacturer and retailer for injuries sustained when a steering cable failed, causing him to be struck by the boat's propeller. The appellate court reversed, holding that the complaint adequately stated caus
• Gantt v. Mobil Chem. Co.
  463 F.2d 691· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury's verdict for the injured employee against the plant owner was supported by the evidence, but the owner's claim for contractual indemnity against the contractor was improperly granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Collins v. Ark. Cement Co.
  453 F.2d 512· 8th Cir.· 1972-01-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain a jury verdict for the plaintiff on the theory of negligent entrustment of dangerous instrumentalities (cherry bombs) by the defendant to its employee.
• Hunsucker v. Arrow Ins.
  242 So. 2d 205· Fla. 1st DCA· 1970-12-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the insurance policy cancellation notice was ineffective because it did not comply with the statutory requirements for providing notice of cancellation and the insured's rights.
• Alford v. Parker's Mech. Constructors, Inc.
  241 So. 2d 759· Fla. 1st DCA· 1970-12-08 ·cited 4×
  State courts lack jurisdiction over union conduct arguably prohibited or protected by the National Labor Relations Act, even if framed as a contract claim.