Exculpatory Clause

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

• Rollins, Inc. v. Heller
  454 So. 2d 580· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-06-26 ·cited 104×
  Rollins appeals a judgment finding it liable for gross negligence and deceptive and unfair trade practices in connection with a burglar alarm system that failed during a burglary. The court reverses and remands, holding that damages for gross negligence are limited by the contrac
• O'Connell v. Walt Disney World Co.
  413 So. 2d 444· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-05-05 ·cited 81×
  A minor was injured during a horseback ride at Disney World when horses stampeded. The court reversed summary judgment for Disney, holding that the release form lacked clear language exculpating the defendant for its own negligence, and material factual disputes existed regarding
• Ivey Plants, Inc. v. FMC Corp.
  282 So. 2d 205· Fla. 4th DCA· 1973-08-29 ·cited 70×
  Ivey Plants and Osceola Fruit Distributors appealed summary judgment dismissing their breach of contract and negligence claims against FMC Corporation arising from equipment damage caused by a fire in 1964. The court reversed, holding that paragraph 16 of the lease agreement—cont
• Neville Chem. Co. v. Union Carbide Corp.
  422 F.2d 1205· 3d Cir.· 1970-02-06 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the jury's findings of negligence and breach of warranty were supported by sufficient evidence, and that the contract did not effectively disclaim liability for the resulting odor problem.
• Isbell v. Carnival Corp.
  462 F. Supp. 2d 1232· S.D. Fla.· 2006-11-20 ·cited 63×
  A cruise ship operator is not liable for injuries sustained on a third-party shore excursion, even if the excursion was recommended, absent proof of the operator's actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition or a breach of duty related to the excursion.
• Middleton v. Lomaskin
  266 So. 2d 678· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-09-19 ·cited 58×
  Tenant Middleton appealed a summary judgment dismissing his personal injury claim against his landlords, arguing that the lease's exculpatory clause waiving liability for the landlords' negligence was either inapplicable or void as against public policy. The Florida appellate cou
• David Crystal, Inc. v. The Cunard Steam-Ship Co. Ltd.
  339 F.2d 295· 2d Cir.· 1964-12-09 ·cited 57×
  The court should give effect to clear exculpatory language in a contract between sophisticated parties.
• L. Luria & SON, Inc. v. Alarmtec Int'l Corp.
  384 So. 2d 947· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-06-18 ·cited 52×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of a burglar alarm company's exculpatory clause case, holding that the contract clause clearly and unequivocally absolved the alarm service provider from liability for losses due to burglary or negligence in performing it
• Lichten v. E. Airlines, Inc.
  189 F.2d 939· 2d Cir.· 1951-05-22 ·cited 52×
  A tariff provision filed with the Civil Aeronautics Board, exempting an air carrier from liability for loss of jewelry, is valid and enforceable, even if it conflicts with common law principles regarding carrier negligence.
• Kirton v. Fields
  997 So. 2d 349· Fla.· 2008-12-11 ·cited 51×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that parents cannot execute pre-injury releases on behalf of minor children for participation in commercial activities, as such releases are unenforceable as against public policy and violate the state's parens patriae duty to protect children's sub
• Tyler v. Dowell, Inc.
  274 F.2d 890· 10th Cir.· 1960-01-14 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to give specific jury instructions on negligence and in admitting evidence of subsequent remedial measures for impeachment. The court also found that the insurance company's loan receipt did not make it the real party in inter
• Mankap Enters., Inc. v. Wells Fargo Alarm Servs.
  427 So. 2d 332· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-03-01 ·cited 41×
  Mankap Enterprises sued Wells Fargo Alarm Services for damages resulting from a failed burglar alarm system, alleging intentional misrepresentation, negligence, and unconscionable exculpatory clauses. The appellate court affirmed summary judgment on the negligence and unconsciona
• S. A. Empresa de Viacao Aerea RIO Grandense (Varig Airlines) v. The Boeing Co.
  641 F.2d 746· 9th Cir.· 1981-04-06 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the exculpatory clause, governed by Washington law, was valid and enforceable, barring claims for post-delivery negligence, violation of law, fraud, and strict liability.
• DELTA AIR Lines, Inc. v. McDONNELL Douglas Corp.
  503 F.2d 239· 5th Cir.· 1974-10-31 ·cited 40×
  An exculpatory clause in a contract for the sale of an aircraft, which limits liability to contractual warranty provisions and is found to be valid under California law, effectively bars claims for negligence and strict liability, even if a violation of a federal regulation is al
• Scandinavian Airlines Sys. v. United Aircraft Corp.
  601 F.2d 425· 9th Cir.· 1979-07-24 ·cited 38×
  Strict liability under California law is not applicable when a large airline sues a manufacturer for a product defect causing property damage to the product itself and the aircraft, as the parties are commercial entities of relatively equal economic strength.
• J. L. Simmons Co., Inc. v. The United States
  304 F.2d 886· Ct. Cl.· 1962-07-18 ·cited 36×
  A prime contractor can assert subcontractor claims against the government if the releases executed do not expressly negate the prime contractor's liability to the subcontractor.
• Posttape Assocs. v. Eastman Kodak Co.
  537 F.2d 751· 3d Cir.· 1976-06-17 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the imputation of a principal's knowledge of trade usage to the partnership and in excluding evidence of the plaintiff's insurance coverage, both of which were relevant to establishing an agreement to l
• In re the Complaint of Unterweser Reederei v. M/S Bremen & Unterweser Reederei GMBH
  428 F.2d 888· 5th Cir.· 1970-06-19 ·cited 33×
  The court should enforce forum selection clauses unless they are unreasonable or violate public policy, rather than invalidating them outright.
• Sanislo v. Give Kids THE World, Inc.
  157 So. 3d 256· Fla.· 2015-02-12 ·cited 32×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that an exculpatory clause need not contain express language referring to 'negligence' or 'negligent acts' to be effective in barring a negligence action, provided the clause's language otherwise clearly and unambiguously demonstrates an intent to r
• Hardage Enters., Inc. v. Fidesys Corp., N.V.
  570 So. 2d 436· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-11-29 ·cited 32×
  Hardage Enterprises appeals a declaratory judgment that invalidated a mutual release between it and Fidesys Corporation, finding the release did not clearly bar negligence claims. The appellate court reverses, holding that the release's broad language clearly and unequivocally re
• Cain v. Banka
  932 So. 2d 575· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-06-30 ·cited 30×
  In this appeal, the Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment and held that a general exculpatory release signed in 1999 was unenforceable to bar a negligence claim arising from a 2002 motocross accident. The court found that the release lacked clear and unequivoca
• Syvrud v. Today Real Est., Inc.
  858 So. 2d 1125· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-10-31 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Court of Appeal reversed summary judgment in favor of a listing real estate broker where buyers sought damages for nondisclosure of hidden structural defects in a condominium. The court held that an "as is" clause in the purchase contract did not waive the seller's an
• Bernard Screen Printing Corp. v. Meyer Line
  464 F.2d 934· 2d Cir.· 1972-07-14 ·cited 30×
  A stevedore, as an independent contractor, can benefit from the $500 per unit liability limitation provided in a bill of lading, even if not explicitly named, when the clause clearly extends such benefits to independent contractors.
• Cabot Corp. & Cabot Argentina S.A.I.C. v. S.S. Mormacscan
  441 F.2d 476· 2d Cir.· 1971-03-26 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the language of the bill of lading's limitation clause was not sufficiently clear to extend the $500 per package liability limitation to the stevedore.
• ACE Formal Wear, Inc. v. Baker Protective Serv., Inc.
  416 So. 2d 8· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-06-08 ·cited 29×
  Ace Formal Wear sued Baker Protective Service for breach of contract and negligence after a burglary exploited an unmonitored window in an installed alarm system. The court affirmed summary judgment for Baker, holding that the parties' contractual exculpatory clause clearly limit
• Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc. v. Montagano
  359 So. 2d 512· Fla. 4th DCA· 1978-05-23 ·cited 29×
  Orkin appeals from a jury verdict awarding a homeowner $9,554 for termite damage caused by defective treatment, arguing an exculpatory clause in the termite agreement limited its liability to re-treatment only. The court affirmed, holding that while Florida recognizes exculpatory
• Rosenberg v. Cape Coral Plumbing, Inc.
  920 So. 2d 61· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-12-28 ·cited 28×
  Rosenberg, a general contractor, appealed a trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Cape Coral Plumbing following a flood that caused $70,000 in damages to a house under construction. The appellate court reversed in part, finding that genuine issues of material fact e
• Theis v. J & J Racing Promotions
  571 So. 2d 92· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-12-14 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a clear and unequivocal release and waiver of liability agreement, which specifically mentioned negligence, was broad enough to protect appellees from liability for their own gross negligence.
• Keystone Aeronautics Corp. v. R. J. Enstrom Corp.
  499 F.2d 146· 3d Cir.· 1974-06-26 ·cited 28×
  A freely negotiated and clearly expressed waiver of strict liability under § 402A is permissible between business entities of equal bargaining strength, but the language used must be sufficiently particular to demonstrate this intent.
• William and Jean Tout v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co.
  390 So. 2d 155· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-11-18 ·cited 27×
  Hartford Insurance, as subrogee for a home seller, sued tenants William and Jean Tout for fire damage under a subrogation theory. The trial court struck the Touts' exculpatory clause defense and entered judgment against both defendants. The appellate court affirmed the striking o
• United States v. Hathaway
  242 F.2d 897· 9th Cir.· 1957-03-26 ·cited 26×
  A contract for sale of surplus property 'as is' and 'where is' shifts the risk of unforeseen conditions to the buyer, precluding claims for mutual mistake or breach of contract.
• Vincel v. White Motor Corp. & Glenn F. Kommer
  521 F.2d 1113· 2d Cir.· 1975-08-11 ·cited 25×
  Shareholders cannot bring claims for corporate injury; such claims belong to the corporation and are barred if previously settled by a bankruptcy trustee.
• Manloading & Mgmt. Assocs., Inc. v. The United States
  461 F.2d 1299· Ct. Cl.· 1972-06-16 ·cited 25×
  The dissenting judge believes the contract's written terms should govern, and a statement at a pre-bid conference cannot override the unambiguous contract language regarding renewal.
• Klicker v. Nw. Airlines, Inc.
  563 F.2d 1310· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that an airline tariff rule attempting to fully exculpate the carrier from liability for its own negligence is void as against public policy, and that other tariff rules limiting liability do not apply when the carrier refuses to allow the passenger to declare a hi
• Crescent Towing & Salvage Co. v. Dixilyn Drilling Corp.
  303 F.2d 237· 5th Cir.· 1962-05-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the towage contract did not sufficiently express Dixilyn's intent to indemnify Crescent for damages caused by Crescent's negligence, nor did it clearly afford Crescent the benefit of Dixilyn's insurance.
• Sunny Isles Marina, Inc. v. Avi Adulami
  706 So. 2d 920· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-02-18 ·cited 23×
  Sunny Isles Marina sought to enforce exculpatory clauses in boat storage agreements to shield itself from negligence liability for a fire that damaged customers' vessels. The court held that the exculpatory provisions were ambiguous and unenforceable because paragraphs seven and
• Luick v. Graybar Elec. Co., Inc.
  473 F.2d 1360· 8th Cir.· 1973-02-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that genuine factual issues regarding the inclusion and unconscionability of exculpatory clauses preclude summary judgment on Luick's claim for damages due to late delivery.
• Morrissey v. Curran
  423 F.2d 393· 2d Cir.· 1970-02-20 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the 1969 NMU constitutional amendments were exculpatory and void under LMRDA § 501(a), reversing the denial of the plaintiffs' motion to declare them invalid. The court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for the plaintiffs regarding unauth
• Mohawk Drilling Co. v. McCULLOUGH Tool Co.
  271 F.2d 627· 10th Cir.· 1959-10-07 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to take the case to the jury on the issue of negligence and proximate cause, and that the exculpatory clause in the service contract was ineffective.
• Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. Olvera
  119 F.2d 584· 9th Cir.· 1941-05-02 ·cited 22×
• Applegate v. Cable Water SKI, L.C.
  974 So. 2d 1112· Fla. 5th DCA· 2008-01-04 ·cited 21×
  A Florida appellate court held that exculpatory clauses signed by parents on behalf of children are not enforceable against commercial enterprises in personal injury cases, aligning with national precedent and Florida's strong public policy protecting children from harm. The cour
• N. Helex Co. v. The United States
  524 F.2d 707· Ct. Cl.· 1975-10-22 ·cited 21×
  The court disagreed with the dissenting judge regarding the deduction of estimated cost savings from the contract price owed by the buyer.
• Lantz v. Iron Horse Saloon, Inc.
  717 So. 2d 590· Fla. 5th DCA· 1998-09-04 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while a release should not be raised on a motion to dismiss, the appellant's failure to raise this procedural issue on appeal leads to affirmance.
• Jacquelynne Dale Fountain Levine v. A. Madley Corp. & Carlyle & Co. Jewelers
  516 So. 2d 1101· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-12-17 ·cited 20×
  A general release clause does not unequivocally inform a party that they are releasing the other party from liability for their own negligence.
• U. S. Indus., Inc. v. Blake Constr. Co., Inc.
  671 F.2d 539· D.C. Cir.· 1982-01-26 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the jury award for delay and disruption damages, the grant of summary judgment for USI on one claim, and the grant of judgment n.o.v. on a portion of the jury award, while reversing the dismissal of two other claims.
• Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Gulf Ref. Co. & Villa LeBlanc
  230 F.2d 346· 5th Cir.· 1956-02-20 ·cited 20×
• John & Elaine Rose & State Farm Ins. Co. v. ADT Sec. Servs., Inc.
  989 So. 2d 1244· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-09-11 ·cited 19×
  John and Elaine Rose and their insurer State Farm appealed summary judgment in favor of ADT Security Services after the Roses' home was destroyed by fire and ADT's alarm system failed. The court affirmed, holding that the written service agreement's clear disclaimers of warrantie
• Murphy v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n OF Lake Wales, Inc.
  974 So. 2d 565· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-02-15 ·cited 18×
  An exculpatory clause in a YMCA membership agreement is unenforceable if it does not clearly and unequivocally release the YMCA from liability for its own negligence, especially when juxtaposed with language suggesting reasonable precautions will be taken.
• L. Luria & SON, Inc. v. Honeywell, Inc.
  460 So. 2d 521· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-12-12 ·cited 18×
  Exculpatory clauses in burglar alarm contracts are generally enforceable, but do not bar claims for fraud.
• Complaint of Twenty Grand Offshore, Inc. v. W. India Carriers, Inc.
  492 F.2d 679· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-12 ·cited 18×
  Agreements allocating responsibility for obtaining insurance, naming the tower as an additional assured, are valid and do not violate the policy against exculpation for negligence.