Master-Servant Relationship

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

• Banfield v. Addison S. Addington and Daisy T. Addington
  104 Fla. 661· Fla.· 1932-04-05 ·cited 193×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a married woman operating a beauty shop can be held liable in tort for negligent injuries caused by her employee, despite earlier common law restrictions on married women's legal liability. The court found that modern statutes authorizing marri
• Blackburn v. Dorta
  348 So. 2d 287· Fla.· 1977-05-05 ·cited 183×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a split among district courts by holding that the affirmative defense of implied assumption of risk has been merged into the defense of contributory negligence and is now subject to comparative negligence principles following Hoffman v. Jones. T
• 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
• Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co. v. Am. Dist. Elec. Protective Co.
  106 Fla. 330· Fla.· 1932-08-02 ·cited 119×
  The court held that a railroad company could seek indemnity from a signal company for damages paid to an injured employee, even though both companies were potentially liable to the employee. The railroad company's liability stemmed from its employer-employee relationship, while t
• Chuy v. The Philadelphia Eagles Football Club (sued as "The Philadelphia Eagles")
  595 F.2d 1265· 3d Cir.· 1979-03-09 ·cited 110×
  The court held that the trial court erred in not submitting to the jury the question of whether the average reader understood Dr. Nixon's statements as tending to injure Mr. Chuy's professional reputation, necessitating a remand for a new trial on the defamation claim.
• 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
• Peery v. Mershon
  5 So.2d 694· Fla.· 1942-01-20 ·cited 72×
  This case concerns whether an employee injured while riding in her employer's car, as part of her job duties, is considered a "guest passenger" under Florida's guest statute, which requires proof of gross negligence. The court held that such an employee is not a guest and can rec
• Marshall v. Nugent
  222 F.2d 604· 1st Cir.· 1955-05-13 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to direct a verdict for Socony, as issues of contributory negligence, proximate cause, and scope of employment were properly submitted to the jury.
• United States v. Eleazer
  177 F.2d 914· 4th Cir.· 1949-11-07 ·cited 62×
  The United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries caused by a military officer driving his own vehicle on personal leave, as he was not acting within the scope of his employment.
• 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
• Short v. Central States
  729 F.2d 567· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-12 ·cited 57×
  The court held that owner-operators Short and Zorn were employees under the pension plan, entitling them to benefits, and that procedural requirements for benefit denials were not met in Short's case.
• Dowling v. Nicholson
  135 So. 288· Fla.· 1931-05-27 ·cited 54×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for a plaintiff injured in a car accident, holding that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove the defendant was responsible for the negligent driver or the truck involved. The court emphasized the need for direc
• Terminal R. Ass'n of ST. Louis v. Fitzjohn
  165 F.2d 473· 8th Cir.· 1948-01-07 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in instructing the jury that the plaintiff was an employee of the defendant under the Federal Employers' Liability Act and in submitting the question of the defendant's negligence and the plaintiff's contributory negligence to the j
• Lebeck v. William A. Jarvis, Inc.
  250 F.2d 285· 3d Cir.· 1957-10-30 ·cited 45×
• Wood v. Holiday Inns, Inc.
  508 F.2d 167· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-17 ·cited 44×
  The court held that a jury could reasonably find Gulf liable for Goynes' actions based on agency principles and that apparent authority could establish Holiday Inns' liability, but affirmed the denial of indemnification.
• Kenneth Smith for Weaver's Lakeland Steam Laundry v. Reuben Coleman
  100 Fla. 1707· Fla.· 1931-01-12 ·cited 43×
  This case addresses whether a trustee operating a business in an active trust can be held liable for workplace injuries and clarifies the scope of admissions under a plea of not guilty in tort actions involving inducement allegations. The court affirmed a judgment for $1500 again
• Drexel v. Union Prescription Ctrs., Inc.
  582 F.2d 781· 3d Cir.· 1978-08-11 ·cited 40×
  The court held that genuine issues of material fact exist regarding both a master-servant relationship and an apparent agency relationship between the franchisor and franchisee, precluding summary judgment.
• Green v. Sansom
  41 Fla. 94· Fla.· 1899-01-01 ·cited 38×
  W. C. Green Company, contractors constructing a federal building, were sued by Richard Sansom for injuries sustained when a rope hoistaway failed while he was repairing plumbing. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the jury verdict, holding that plaintiff failed to establish negli
• Padgett v. The Sch. Bd. OF Escambia Cnty.
  395 So. 2d 584· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-03-18 ·cited 37×
  A minor injured at a school crossing brought a negligence action against the School Board of Escambia County. The trial court dismissed the complaint for failure to allege a duty owed to the plaintiff. The appellate court reversed in part, holding that allegations the school prin
• Lodge 1858 v. Webb
  580 F.2d 496· D.C. Cir.· 1978-03-20 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the district court applied an erroneous legal standard in determining whether contractor employees were federal employees, and that the proper standard requires proof of a master-servant relationship based on common-law principles, focusing on the degree of ac
• Arceneaux v. Texaco, Inc.
  623 F.2d 924· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-25 ·cited 35×
  The court held that evidence of apparent authority and warranty through advertising was inadmissible without proof of plaintiff's reliance, and post-accident design changes were irrelevant to prove negligent design.
• United States v. Gardner
  475 F.2d 1273· 9th Cir.· 1973-03-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain Gardner's conviction for simple possession, and reversed Le Boulanger's conspiracy convictions due to lack of substantial evidence for a third conspirator.
• Derald J. Jacobi and Mary Charett v. Claude Nolan, Inc.
  122 So. 2d 783· Fla. 1st DCA· 1960-09-08 ·cited 34×
  In this negligence case, the appellants sued Claude Nolan, Inc. for injuries from a car accident caused by Pinkerton, whom the plaintiffs claimed was authorized by the dealership to operate the vehicle. The court reversed a summary judgment in favor of the defendant, holding that
• Jacques v. Miami Ice & Cold Storage Co.
  73 Fla. 1193· Fla.· 1917-05-26 ·cited 32×
  An employee hired to tear down or repair a building assumes the risk of injury from hidden defects in the structure when the dangerous condition is ascertainable by reasonable inspection and the employer does not direct the method of work. The doctrine requiring an employer to pr
• Sassaman v. Pa. R. Co.
  144 F.2d 950· 3d Cir.· 1944-09-12 ·cited 30×
  A railroad employee traveling to or from work on a pass furnished by the employer is considered a passenger for hire, rendering any liability release on the pass void.
• White v. Holmes
  89 Fla. 251· Fla.· 1925-03-16 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment awarding damages against an automobile owner for injuries caused by a bailee-driver. The court held that an automobile owner who rents a vehicle without driver to a hirer is not liable for the bailee's negligence absent a master-serva
• Standard Oil Co. of Cal. v. United States
  153 F.2d 958· 9th Cir.· 1946-02-14 ·cited 28×
  The government cannot recover lost wages and medical expenses for an injured soldier's lost services, as the government-soldier relationship is not analogous to master-servant under California Civil Code § 49, and the soldier's release covered these damages.
• United States v. Sharpe
  189 F.2d 239· 4th Cir.· 1951-05-10 ·cited 26×
  The United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries caused by a service member driving a personal vehicle for personal reasons, even if traveling to a duty station.
• Kasanof v. Embry-Riddle Co.
  157 Fla. 677· Fla.· 1946-07-02 ·cited 26×
  This case involves a wrongful death claim arising from a fatal airplane crash during pilot training. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, but permitted amendment to cure defects in the pleading.
• Cooner v. United States
  276 F.2d 220· 4th Cir.· 1960-03-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that under New York law, the United States was liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for the negligence of a military officer driving his own vehicle between duty stations, as he was acting within the scope of his employment.
• Elisabeth Byrne v. Pa. R.R. Co.
  262 F.2d 906· 3d Cir.· 1958-12-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the jury was entitled to find that the decedent was a "common employee" of both Westinghouse and the Railroad, and that the trial court's jury instructions on employment status were adequate.
• Conasauga River Lumber Co. v. Wade
  221 F.2d 312· 6th Cir.· 1955-04-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the lumber company's contract with Evans established him as an independent contractor, not an employee, thus relieving the company of liability for his negligence.
• United States v. Bowen
  290 F.2d 40· 5th Cir.· 1961-05-02 ·cited 19×
  The court held that a former government employee's alleged self-dealing and acceptance of fees in projects related to his employment constitutes a breach of fidelity, entitling the government to an accounting of all profits, not just salary during overlapping periods.
• City OF Mount Dora v. Gertrude Voorhees
  115 So. 2d 586· Fla. 2d DCA· 1959-10-09 ·cited 19×
  A city was sued for wrongful death when a worker for an independent contractor was electrocuted while removing electrical lines. The court reversed the judgment against the city, holding that the city did not assume control over the contractor's employee merely by relaying a sign
• Hilldrup Transfer & Storage of New Smyrna Beach, Inc. v. State
  447 So. 2d 414· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-03-22 ·cited 18×
  Hilldrup Transfer & Storage appeals a determination by Florida's Division of Employment Security that contract truck drivers operating in its interstate moving business are employees subject to state unemployment tax. The court reverses, finding the drivers are independent contra
• Woods v. Nicholas
  163 F.2d 615· 10th Cir.· 1947-09-05 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the relationship between the taxpayer and the taxicab owners and drivers was not one of employer and employee under the Social Security Act.
• Ryder v. Plumley
  138 Fla. 378· Fla.· 1939-06-02 ·cited 17×
  In this negligence case, a laborer injured during the transportation of machinery by a truck hired from a trucking company sued for damages. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a $5,000 jury verdict, but reduced the award to $3,000 through remittitur, rejecting the defendant's arg
• Yeldell v. Tutt
  913 F.2d 533· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-07 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, finding that the Yeldells established diversity jurisdiction, the Tutts waived their personal jurisdiction defense, and there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings on defamation, malice, damages, and Capitol Ameri
• Mays v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
  323 F.2d 174· 3d Cir.· 1963-08-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the insurer is not an 'employer' under the Pennsylvania Workmen's Compensation Act, and therefore the employee's negligence suit against the insurer is not barred.
• Merwin v. Kellems
  78 So. 2d 865· Fla.· 1955-03-16 ·cited 16×
  This case involves an appeal from a jury verdict awarding damages for personal injury in a car accident. The appellate court affirmed the jury's findings regarding negligence, the extent of damages, and the employment relationship between the driver and a corporate defendant, uph
• 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
• Mobil OIL Corp. v. OIL, Chem. & Atomic Workers Int'l Union, AFL-CIO
  504 F.2d 272· 5th Cir.· 1974-11-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Texas right to work law applies to this employment relationship, invalidating the agency shop provision, because Texas has a significant interest and the federal labor legislation permits such application.
• Mrs. Odette Kiff v. The Travelers Ins. Co.
  402 F.2d 129· 5th Cir.· 1968-09-11 ·cited 14×
• Brucker v. United States
  338 F.2d 427· 9th Cir.· 1964-11-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the pilot was not an agent or servant of the United States, and the Club president's authorization of the flight was not negligent, thus precluding liability under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
• Mrs. Ruby L. Porter v. ST. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co.
  354 F.2d 840· 5th Cir.· 1966-01-14 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the plaintiff's motion to remand the case to state court because the complaint invoked the Federal Employers' Liability Act, which generally prohibits removal.
• Indian River Foods Inc. v. Braswell
  660 So. 2d 1093· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-08-23 ·cited 12×
  Indian River Foods, owner of a citrus processing plant, contracted with Gulf Machinery Company, an independent contractor, to perform construction work. When a Gulf employee died in an explosion while modifying a condensate water tank containing flammable d'limonene, the estate s
• United States v. State OF Md.
  322 F.2d 1009· D.C. Cir.· 1963-06-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Captain McCoy, a civilian air technician paid by the United States to care for federal property allocated to the Air National Guard, was an employee of the United States acting within the scope of his employment under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The court als
• Goldie v. Dillon
  140 So. 2d 81· Fla. 2d DCA· 1962-04-18 ·cited 12×
  Goldie appealed a summary judgment dismissing his negligence claim against service station owner Dillon after Goldie was injured by a lawn mower operated by Douglas, a bystander. The court reversed, holding that a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding whether Douglas be
• Ball v. I. C. Helmly Furniture Co., Inc.
  132 Fla. 882· Fla.· 1938-06-18 ·cited 12×
  Elizabeth Ball, injured when struck by a truck operated by fellow employee Hargrove during her lunch hour, sued her employer Helmly Furniture Co. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's dismissal on demurrer, holding that the fellow-servant rule does not apply when a
• Hayes v. Morse
  474 F.2d 1265· 8th Cir.· 1973-03-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the pension fund trustees acted arbitrarily and improperly in determining the owner-operators were not employees for pension benefit purposes.