Respondeat Superior

2,254 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Linwood Parker v. W. W. Moore & Sons, Inc.
  528 F.2d 764· 4th Cir.· 1975-09-30 ·cited 6×
  A federal court does not have ancillary jurisdiction over a plaintiff's direct claim against a third-party defendant who is not diverse from the plaintiff.
• Joseph v. Orleans
  509 F.2d 197· 6th Cir.· 1975-01-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a community action agency funded and heavily regulated by the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) could be considered a federal agency for purposes of the Federal Tort Claims Act, despite its contractor-like funding structure, when its operations were subject
• 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
• Higgins v. Invs. Acceptance Co. OF Miami
  287 So. 2d 724· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-01-08 ·cited 6×
  This case addresses whether a debt collector's company is vicariously liable for assault and battery committed by an unidentified second person brought along by the collector for purported safety purposes. The court held that absent evidence of employer knowledge, authorization,
• Brinkley v. Farmers Elevator Mut. Ins. Co.
  485 F.2d 1283· 10th Cir.· 1973-10-16 ·cited 6×
  A client is not liable under respondeat superior for an attorney's tortious conduct if the attorney was not acting within the scope of employment and the client lacked the right to control the attorney's actions at the time of the tort.
• Eusebio Guerrero Guillen v. Kuykendall
  470 F.2d 745· 5th Cir.· 1972-12-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the father could be liable under respondeat superior and that the plaintiff was entitled to a jury instruction on exemplary damages.
• Roark v. Peters
  242 So. 2d 199· Fla. 1st DCA· 1970-12-15 ·cited 6×
  Plaintiff Roark appeals a summary judgment dismissing his negligence action against Allied Van Lines and Malloy Bros., arguing they should be liable for injuries caused by their employee Ben Peters. The court affirmed the summary judgment, holding that the written contract establ
• Bremen State Bank v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. & Bekins Van & Storage Co.
  427 F.2d 425· 7th Cir.· 1970-04-30 ·cited 6×
  A bank's loss due to money being misplaced and subsequently stolen is covered by a banker's blanket bond under the 'misplacement' clause, and an employer is not liable for an employee's theft of money that came into his possession inadvertently and not in furtherance of the emplo
• S. Life & Health Ins. Co. & James D. Lewis v. Smith
  218 So. 2d 784· Fla. 1st DCA· 1969-02-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an employee driving his own car to his employer's office to deliver collections and attend a sales meeting was acting within the scope of his employment.
• Kirby v. Union Carbide Corp.
  373 F.2d 590· 4th Cir.· 1967-02-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the decedent was an employee of Du Pont, not Carbide, and therefore Carbide was not immune from suit under the West Virginia Workmen's Compensation Act.
• City OF Hialeah v. Hutchins
  189 So. 2d 165· Fla. 3d DCA· 1966-07-26 ·cited 6×
  The City of Hialeah appeals a jury verdict awarding damages to a plaintiff injured by a police officer's assault and battery. The appellate court reverses and remands, directing entry of judgment against the City for only the amount of compensatory damages found against the indiv
• Albertis Rogers v. Cont'l Cas. Co.
  155 So. 2d 641· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-08-07 ·cited 6×
  The court considered whether an insurance policy covered injuries sustained by a crane operator and another individual when the crane, used to load trucks, came into contact with a high-tension wire.
• Buck Witt v. The United States
  319 F.2d 704· 9th Cir.· 1963-06-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the pilots were acting outside the scope of their employment when the negligent acts occurred, and the government was not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The court also held that there was no ratification of the pilots' conduct by the government.
• Rutland v. Sikes
  311 F.2d 538· 4th Cir.· 1962-12-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the findings that the defendants were responsible as masters for the acts of their truck driver and that the driver's negligence proximately caused the death.
• Hartness v. Aldens, Inc.
  301 F.2d 228· 7th Cir.· 1962-04-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Illinois conflict of laws rule, as interpreted by the District Court, does not offend the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
• OIL Daily, Inc. v. Faulkner
  282 F.2d 14· 10th Cir.· 1960-09-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the employee's decision to return to Durant to spend the night was not a legal abandonment of his employer's business, thus the employer remained liable.
• 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
• Ingram Tedder v. Merchs. & Mfrs. Ins. Co. of N.Y.
  251 F.2d 250· 4th Cir.· 1958-01-06 ·cited 6×
  A corporation can be held liable for slanderous remarks made by its agent if the agent was acting within the scope of employment and the remarks were not privileged or the privilege was lost.
• Leonard v. United States
  235 F.2d 330· 10th Cir.· 1956-06-23 ·cited 6×
  The United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for the negligence of a military member if the member was acting outside the scope of their employment on a personal mission.
• RAY v. United States
  228 F.2d 574· 5th Cir.· 1955-12-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the United States was not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries sustained from an electrical explosion, as the plaintiff failed to prove actionable negligence by the government or its contractors.
• Barr v. Colo. Interstate GAS Co.
  217 F.2d 85· 5th Cir.· 1954-11-23 ·cited 6×
• United States v. Trubow
  214 F.2d 192· 9th Cir.· 1954-06-21 ·cited 6×
  The United States is liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries caused by the negligent condition of its premises, even if the liability stems from landowner duties rather than direct employee negligence.
• 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.
• Phillips Oil Co. v. Linn
  194 F.2d 903· 5th Cir.· 1952-03-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury was authorized to find the defendant guilty of gross negligence, warranting exemplary damages, based on the evidence of a mislabeled gas line that led to an employee's death.
• Holland et ux. v. Cooper
  192 F.2d 214· 5th Cir.· 1951-11-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the owner of a vehicle is not liable for an employee's negligence when the employee is using the vehicle for a purely personal purpose disconnected from the owner's business.
• Grain Dealers Nat. Mut. Fire. Ins. Co. v. Harrison
  190 F.2d 726· 5th Cir.· 1951-06-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an airplane in operation is a dangerous agency under Florida law, making the owner liable for the pilot's negligence.
• Smith v. S. PAC. Co.
  187 F.2d 397· 9th Cir.· 1951-02-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the complaints stated a cause of action against the individual defendant under Oregon law, and therefore removal to federal court was improper.
• Christian v. United States
  184 F.2d 523· 6th Cir.· 1950-10-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the soldier was acting outside the scope of his employment when he negligently caused the death of the deputy sheriff.
• Nicholson v. United States
  177 F.2d 768· 5th Cir.· 1949-11-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that neither the contract provision nor the Federal Tort Claims Act's exception for interference with contract rights barred the plaintiff's tort claim for damages caused by prisoner of war labor.
• M. J. Uline Co., Inc. v. Cashdan
  171 F.2d 132· D.C. Cir.· 1948-10-18 ·cited 6×
  A principal is not liable for an agent's tort unless it is within the scope of employment, meaning it must be actuated in part by a purpose to serve the principal.
• Gaynor v. Agwilines, Inc.
  169 F.2d 612· 3d Cir.· 1948-08-04 ·cited 6×
• Terminal Transp. Co., Inc. v. Foster
  164 F.2d 248· 5th Cir.· 1947-11-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in its jury charge regarding the burden of proof to rebut the presumption of employment and in failing to properly address prejudicial arguments by plaintiff's counsel.
• 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.
• De Bord v. Proctor & Gamble Distrib. Co.
  146 F.2d 54· 5th Cir.· 1944-11-07 ·cited 6×
  The owner of a vehicle is not liable for the negligence of an independent contractor's employee driving the vehicle, even if the contractor lacks proper licensing, as long as the owner did not retain control over the operation.
• Rabenovets v. Crossland
  137 F.2d 675· D.C. Cir.· 1943-06-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the corporation was not liable for the driver's negligence as there was no evidence of control over his driving. The judgment against the driver was affirmed.
• Ammond v. Pa. R. Co.
  125 F.2d 747· 6th Cir.· 1942-02-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the District Court had the power to enjoin the plaintiff from enforcing a state court judgment after the railroad defendant's removal petition was denied, as a separable controversy existed.
• Quitman McDougald v. Couey
  145 Fla. 689· Fla.· 1941-01-24 ·cited 6×
  A declaration alleging personal injury caused by negligent operation of an automobile owned by the defendant is fatally defective when it fails to allege that the owner was the operator or that the operator acted as the owner's agent, servant, or employee, or with the owner's kno
• Bond M. Wright and Husband T. J. Wright v. Ga. S. & Fla. Ry. Co.
  66 Fla. 510· Fla.· 1913-12-16 ·cited 6×
  Wright sought damages against Georgia Southern & Florida Railway for removing her from a train after she boarded without a ticket and for causing her arrest by local authorities. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of her claims, holding that she was a trespasser rather
• Forsyth v. Perry
  5 Fla. 337· Fla.· 1853-01-01 ·cited 6×
  This case addresses whether boat owners are liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior for injuries to a hired slave caused by the negligence of their agent (a mate). The Florida Supreme Court held that slave owners can recover against the boat owners because slaves, as pro
• Mohamad R. Samiian, M.D. v. Johnson
  302 So. 3d 966· Fla. 1st DCA· 2020-08-07 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgments in a bad faith insurance action and a legal malpractice action. The appellant, a retired surgeon, sued his insurer (FPIC) for bad faith and his attorneys (Foley Defendants) for malpractice after a patient's death led to a l
• Dep't OF Child. & Fam. Servs. v. Chapman
  9 So. 3d 676· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-04-15 ·cited 5×
  The Department of Children and Family Services appealed judgments totaling $400,000 awarded to two families whose children were harmed by a negligently licensed substance abuse counselor. The court reversed, holding that DCF's statutory duty to license and regulate substance abus
• Battiste v. Lamberti
  571 F. Supp. 2d 1286· S.D. Fla.· 2008-08-11 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the arresting deputies are not entitled to qualified immunity on the plaintiffs' false arrest and First Amendment retaliation claims, as genuine issues of material fact exist regarding probable cause and retaliatory motive.
• Huntley v. Carnival Corp.
  307 F. Supp. 2d 1372· S.D. Fla.· 2004-03-12 ·cited 5×
  The court denied Carnival Corporation's motion to dismiss Counts II and IV, finding that a cruise line can be held vicariously liable for the negligence of its ship's doctor.
• Gionis v. Headwest, Inc.
  799 So. 2d 416· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-11-16 ·cited 5×
  George Gionis, a DER supervisor, appealed the trial court's denial of his motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity in a § 1983 civil rights case. The Fifth District granted certiorari review of the non-final order, finding that the trial court erred by denying qual
• Liberty Sec. Corp. v. Fetcho
  114 F. Supp. 2d 1319· S.D. Fla.· 2000-09-13 ·cited 5×
  The court confirmed the arbitration award, finding no grounds to vacate it under the Federal Arbitration Act.
• Sunpoint Sec., Inc. v. Porta
  979 F. Supp. 2d 1284· M.D. Fla.· 2000-03-31 ·cited 5×
  The court held that while permissive joinder of Mr. Drivas under Rule 20(a) was proper, the Plaintiff's complaint to vacate the arbitration award lacked factual support for its claims of undue means and partiality, leading to dismissal.
• Samarco v. Neumann
  44 F. Supp. 2d 1276· S.D. Fla.· 1999-03-04 ·cited 5×
  Summary judgment is granted for the defendants because the plaintiff failed to establish an unconstitutional policy or that the force used was excessive under the Fourth Amendment.
• McKeon v. Vaicaitis
  825 F. Supp. 290· M.D. Fla.· 1993-06-16 ·cited 5×
  The court held that summary judgment is granted for defendants Palermo and Moyer, and denied for defendants Peters and Diagnostic Clinic, as genuine issues of material fact exist regarding discrimination claims against Peters and the Clinic.
• DOE v. Doe
  945 F.2d 1422· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-03 ·cited 5×
  The court held that evidence was sufficient for a jury to find that security guards acted within the scope of their employment, even if motivated by personal gratification, and that invasion of privacy does not require being taped in a state of undress. However, the court remande
• Peterson v. City OF Plymouth
  945 F.2d 1416· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-01 ·cited 5×
  The court held that officers were not entitled to qualified immunity for arresting Peterson without probable cause and that the district court erred in dismissing remaining state law claims based on lawful arrest findings.