Independent Contractor Exception

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

• 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
• Lurch v. United States
  719 F.2d 333· 10th Cir.· 1983-10-12 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the physician was an independent contractor, not a federal employee, and thus the United States was not liable under the FTCA for his alleged negligence.
• Patrick v. Faircloth Buick Co.
  185 So. 2d 522· Fla. 2d DCA· 1966-04-20 ·cited 20×
  The plaintiff-appellant sued the owner of an automobile under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine after being struck by a car driven by an employee of a repair shop on the repair shop's premises. The court held that the dangerous instrumentality doctrine does not apply when an
• Baxley v. Dixie Land & Timber Co.
  521 So. 2d 170· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-02-08 ·cited 17×
  Sadie Baxley, representing her deceased son Lloyd Baxley's estate, appealed summary judgment dismissing her negligence claim against Dixie Land & Timber Company for injuries sustained during logging operations. The court reversed, holding that Baxley's status at the time of his d
• Harfred Auto Imports, Inc. v. Yaxley
  343 So. 2d 79· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-03-03 ·cited 14×
  In this appeal from a judgment holding automobile dealer Harfred liable under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine for damages caused by a collision while an independent contractor repair shop had the car in its possession for testing, the court reversed, holding that an indepe
• Maule Indus., Inc. v. Watson
  201 So. 2d 631· Fla. 3d DCA· 1967-08-01 ·cited 11×
  An owner of property may not invoke the independent contractor defense to escape liability for negligence where substantial evidence establishes that the owner itself was negligent. The defense articulated in Florida Power and Light Co. v. Price does not apply when the defendant
• Jack LEE Buick, Inc. v. Bolton
  377 So. 2d 226· Fla. 1st DCA· 1979-11-16 ·cited 10×
  Jack Lee Buick, a used car dealership, appeals a summary judgment holding it liable under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine for an accident that occurred while one of its vehicles was being transported to a detailing service. The court affirms, holding that the dangerous ins
• Huie v. Wipperfurth
  632 So. 2d 1109· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-03-04 ·cited 8×
  An employee of a kennel bit by a dog boarded for obedience training sued the dog's owner under Florida's dog-bite statute. The trial court applied an independent contractor exception to bar recovery, but the appellate court reversed, holding that section 767.04 supersedes common-
• Christy v. Fla. Power Corp.
  232 So. 2d 744· Fla. 1st DCA· 1970-01-15 ·cited 8×
• Atlas Powder Co. v. Hanson
  136 F.2d 444· 8th Cir.· 1943-06-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the work performed by the plaintiff was an operation of the defendant's usual business, making the defendant a statutory employer under the Missouri Workmen's Compensation Act, and thus precluding a common law negligence claim.
• Hanson J. Broussard v. United States
  989 F.2d 171· 5th Cir.· 1993-03-24 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the United States is not liable for the negligence of an independent contractor physician under the FTCA, and that causation is a necessary element for any negligence claim.
• Bird v. United States
  949 F.2d 1079· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the CRNA was an employee of the government for FTCA purposes, not an independent contractor, because the government retained the power to control the detailed physical performance of the CRNA's duties.
• Michalek v. Shumate
  511 So. 2d 377· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-07-22 ·cited 2×
  Gerald Michalek appeals summary judgment dismissing his negligence claim against the Shumates, who owned a car struck by their employee while picking up the vehicle from a car cleaning service. The court affirmed, holding that the dangerous instrumentality doctrine does not apply
• Larsen v. Empresas EL Yunque, Inc.
  812 F.2d 14· 1st Cir.· 1986-12-30 ·cited 2×
  The United States is not liable for torts committed by independent contractors operating on its property, due to sovereign immunity.
• Manning v. United States
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-06-28
  The court granted the defendant's motion to dismiss because the plaintiff failed to respond, and the defendant's arguments regarding the discretionary function and independent contractor exceptions to the FTCA were plausible.
• Cochran v. United States
  38 F. Supp. 2d 986· N.D. Fla.· 1998-09-01
  The court held that the United States is shielded from liability by the discretionary function exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act, thus dismissing the plaintiff's claims for lack of jurisdiction.
• Monroe E. Berkman v. United States
  957 F.2d 108· 4th Cir.· 1992-02-20
  The court held that the Federal Tort Claims Act's independent contractor exception shields the United States from liability for the negligence of an independent contractor, even if state law imposes a nondelegable duty on landowners. However, the court remanded the case to consid
• Comer v. Rodriguez
  346 So. 2d 113· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-05-24
  The Comers appealed a summary judgment dismissing their negligence claim against Merlin, Inc. for injuries sustained when an employee of an independent contractor (Rowland Truck Equipment) was struck by a truck chassis owned by Merlin and operated by another contractor employee.