Willful And Wanton Misconduct

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

• Royal Carraway v. Revell
  116 So. 2d 16· Fla.· 1959-11-25 ·cited 313×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict regarding the standard for gross negligence in guest passenger automobile negligence cases. The court held that gross negligence under the guest statute does not require the same degree of culpable negligence necessary for a manslaugh
• Mercury Motors Express, Inc. v. Smith
  393 So. 2d 545· Fla.· 1981-01-22 ·cited 264×
  Mercury Motors Express appealed a jury verdict awarding $250,000 in punitive damages following a death caused by its employee's reckless driving under the influence. The Florida Supreme Court held that an employer cannot be held vicariously liable for punitive damages under respo
• Iberia Hampton v. The City OF Chicago
  484 F.2d 602· 7th Cir.· 1973-08-24 ·cited 137×
  The court held that state law cannot immunize conduct wrongful under federal civil rights statutes, and that prosecutorial conduct in planning a raid is not immune. It also found that allegations of conspiracy to prolong unfounded prosecutions were sufficient to survive a motion
• U.S. Concrete Pipe Co. v. Bould
  437 So. 2d 1061· Fla.· 1983-07-07 ·cited 134×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district court decisions regarding whether an insurer can avoid coverage for punitive damages assessed against an employer on the theory of negligent hiring. The Court held that when a jury verdict for punitive damages does no
• Cormier v. Williams
  148 Fla. 201· Fla.· 1941-09-26 ·cited 102×
  A Florida Supreme Court case addressing whether a declaration sufficiently alleged gross negligence under the guest statute where a car zigzagged across a road before a collision. The court also grappled with whether 'gross negligence' and 'willful and wanton misconduct' are syno
• Ingram v. Pettit
  340 So. 2d 922· Fla.· 1976-12-09 ·cited 88×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed whether a jury should consider punitive damages when negligence is coupled with intoxication, specifically in a rear-end collision case.
• Orme v. Burr
  157 Fla. 378· Fla.· 1946-05-03 ·cited 85×
  Two widow plaintiffs appealed jury verdicts in favor of the administrator of Andrew Crawford's estate, seeking damages for the wrongful deaths of their husbands who died in a single-vehicle crash allegedly caused by Crawford's gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct. The
• Roginsky v. Richardson-Merrell, Inc.
  378 F.2d 832· 2d Cir.· 1967-04-04 ·cited 84×
  The court affirmed the award of compensatory damages for injuries allegedly caused by the drug MER/29, finding sufficient evidence of causation for the jury to consider. However, the court reversed the award of punitive damages, concluding that the evidence was insufficient to wa
• Koger v. Hollahan
  144 Fla. 779· Fla.· 1940-11-19 ·cited 83×
  The Florida Supreme Court addressed whether a car owner can be liable to a guest of the vehicle's driver for gross negligence under the state's 1937 guest statute. The court held that the statute only raises the negligence threshold for guest claims from ordinary to gross neglige
• Wade v. Haynes
  663 F.2d 778· 8th Cir.· 1981-11-09 ·cited 81×
  The court held that punitive damages in a § 1983 action require a finding of actual malice, not merely reckless or callous disregard for a prisoner's rights.
• Miller v. State
  75 So. 2d 312· Fla.· 1954-10-29 ·cited 77×
  Miller was convicted of manslaughter for an automobile accident where his vehicle crossed into oncoming traffic. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that the state failed to prove the gross negligence and reckless disregard for human life required to sustain a manslaughte
• Dobb v. Baker
  505 F.2d 1041· 1st Cir.· 1974-11-06 ·cited 74×
  The court held that a federal regulation violation, not raised below, would not be considered on appeal, and affirmed summary judgment for the railroad.
• Shimman v. Frank
  625 F.2d 80· 6th Cir.· 1980-05-21 ·cited 66×
  The court held that collateral estoppel did not apply to bar the civil suit despite a prior criminal case dismissal, and that the district court's findings of liability under the Landrum-Griffin Act and state law were not clearly erroneous.
• Como OIL Co., Inc. v. Celestine O'Loughlin
  466 So. 2d 1061· Fla.· 1985-02-21 ·cited 62×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that punitive damages in a negligence case require proof of willful and wanton misconduct equivalent to criminal manslaughter, not merely gross negligence. The Court quashed a district court decision that had reversed a directed verdict for Como Oil
• Chrysler Corp. v. Wolmer
  499 So. 2d 823· Fla.· 1986-11-26 ·cited 61×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that punitive damages in a wrongful death products liability case require proof of conduct equivalent to manslaughter—reckless disregard for human life—not merely knowledge of a design defect and continued marketing. The Court reversed the district
• Myers v. Korbly
  103 So. 2d 215· Fla. 2d DCA· 1958-04-23 ·cited 60×
  In this negligence action under Florida's guest statute, a jury verdict for plaintiff Richard P. Korbly against defendant Marguerite Myers was upheld. Korbly's 17-year-old son was fatally injured when defendant's son, the driver, failed to negotiate a curve on Bayshore Boulevard
• Nelson v. McMILLAN
  151 Fla. 847· Fla.· 1942-11-17 ·cited 59×
  In this appeal of a guest statute case, the Florida Supreme Court held that sufficient evidence supported a jury verdict finding gross negligence by an automobile driver who failed to stop at a stop sign before entering a busy highway intersection and struck another vehicle. The
• Norb J. Konczak and Linda Konczak v. Tyrrell
  603 F.2d 13· 7th Cir.· 1979-07-12 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the district court properly denied judgment notwithstanding the verdict on constitutional violations, but correctly granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict on punitive damages due to lack of evidence of willful or wanton misconduct. The attorney's fees aw
• Winthrop v. Carinhas
  142 Fla. 588· Fla.· 1940-04-09 ·cited 58×
  A widow sued the owners of a motor vehicle for injuries sustained when their car collided with a safety island structure on a bridge after the driver was allegedly blinded by oncoming headlights. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a jury verdict for the defendants, holding that t
• Est. OF Beulah Despain v. Avante Grp., Inc.
  900 So. 2d 637· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-03-24 ·cited 56×
  The Estate of Beulah Despain appealed the trial court's denial of a motion to amend the complaint to add a claim for punitive damages against nursing home defendants. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the estate made a sufficient showing under Florida Stat
• O'Reilly v. Sattler
  141 Fla. 770· Fla.· 1940-02-16 ·cited 54×
  This case clarifies Florida's guest statute, holding that a passenger must prove "gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct" to recover damages from a vehicle owner or operator. The court found the evidence insufficient to meet this high standard.
• Nat'l CAR Rental Sys., Inc. v. Holland
  269 So. 2d 407· Fla. 4th DCA· 1972-11-30 ·cited 53×
  National Car Rental System appeals a jury verdict in favor of Holland, a truck driver injured in a highway collision caused by a rented vehicle. The appellate court affirmed the judgment despite identifying several trial errors, finding them harmless because the evidence overwhel
• Rishel v. E. Airlines, Inc.
  466 So. 2d 1136· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-03-26 ·cited 49×
  Under the fireman's rule as applied in Florida, a property owner owes no legal duty to a police officer or firefighter for injuries arising from the discharge of their professional duties except to refrain from willful and wanton misconduct and to warn of dangers not open to ordi
• Faircloth v. Hill
  85 So. 2d 870· Fla.· 1956-03-07 ·cited 49×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a trial court's dismissal of a negligence action brought by the administrator of a guest passenger's estate against the driver of a vehicle. The court held that the complaint adequately alleged gross negligence sufficient to state a cause of act
• Union OIL OF Cal. v. Watson
  468 So. 2d 349· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-04-16 ·cited 48×
  Union Oil sued Watson and others for conversion and conspiracy related to the sale of Southern States' assets. After obtaining summary judgment against Watson's corporation (Dade Oil) on conversion, Union Oil voluntarily dismissed the conspiracy count against Watson individually.
• Sullivan v. Stock
  98 So. 2d 507· Fla. 2d DCA· 1957-11-27 ·cited 48×
  Sullivan appealed the dismissal of his negligence complaint against Stock for injuries suffered in a car accident. The court reversed the dismissal of the ordinary negligence count, holding that Sullivan was not a guest passenger under Florida's guest statute because his transpor
• Ivey Jackson v. Edwards
  144 Fla. 187· Fla.· 1940-08-05 ·cited 48×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a guest passenger injured in a motor vehicle accident can recover damages under the 1937 guest statute only if the injury was caused by gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct, and that a complaint alleging such conduct must plead the
• Atlantic Greyhound Lines v. Mrs. Susie B. Lovett
  134 Fla. 505· Fla.· 1938-10-10 ·cited 48×
  Atlantic Greyhound Lines appealed a jury verdict awarding Mrs. Lovett $3,350 in damages for injuries sustained when a bus employee forcibly removed her baggage from inside the bus in violation of her alleged instructions. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the carri
• Yokom v. Rodriguez
  41 So.2d 446· Fla.· 1949-07-15 ·cited 47×
  The court reversed a judgment for the defendant, holding that the plaintiff was a guest in the defendant's car, not a participant in a joint enterprise. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim for simple negligence was insufficient under the Guest Statute.
• Marr v. Rife
  503 F.2d 735· 6th Cir.· 1974-09-26 ·cited 46×
  The court held that federal law, not state law, governs vicarious liability under the Fair Housing Act, and that the District Court should clarify its reasoning for the awards of compensatory damages, costs, and attorney fees.
• In the Matter of: The Complaint of Merry Shipping, Inc. v. Merry Shipping Co., Inc.
  650 F.2d 622· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 44×
  Punitive damages may be recovered under general maritime law upon a showing of willful and wanton misconduct by the shipowner in creating or maintaining unseaworthy conditions.
• Schropp v. Crown Eurocars, Inc.
  654 So. 2d 1158· Fla.· 1995-03-16 ·cited 42×
  The Florida Supreme Court clarified the two bases for corporate punitive damages liability: vicarious liability (requiring willful and wanton employee conduct plus independent corporate negligence) and direct liability (requiring willful and wanton conduct by a managing agent or
• SOL Walker & Co. v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co.
  362 So. 2d 45· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-07-26 ·cited 42×
  This case addresses whether a judgment exonerating a defendant in a personal injury action has res judicata effect on a subsequent contribution claim brought by the plaintiff's other defendant. The court held that a directed verdict in favor of Walker in Warder's injury suit prec
• E. L. Farmer & Co. v. Hooks
  239 F.2d 547· 10th Cir.· 1956-11-26 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty of reasonable care under the circumstances, and the jury's findings on contributory negligence and assumption of risk were supported by the evidence.
• Dexter v. Green
  55 So.2d 548· Fla.· 1951-12-04 ·cited 37×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's dismissal of a lawsuit, finding that a guest passenger's declaration sufficiently alleged gross negligence or willful and wanton misconduct by the driver, allowing the case to proceed to a jury.
• Baltimore & O. R. Co. v. Felgenhauer
  168 F.2d 12· 8th Cir.· 1948-05-19 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict for the plaintiff, and that the trial court did not err in its rulings on evidence or jury instructions.
• Lambert v. Higgins
  63 So. 2d 631· Fla.· 1953-02-27 ·cited 34×
  In a guest statute case arising from an automobile accident, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed a jury verdict for the plaintiff finding gross negligence by the defendant-driver. The court held that the trial court properly managed voir dire questioning about insurance connection
• Potts v. Johnson
  654 So. 2d 596· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-04-26 ·cited 32×
  Detective Potts was injured while trespassing in Johnson's backyard during an unlawful warrantless search for stolen property. The court held that although § 112.182 grants police officers invitee status when lawfully on premises, Potts's warrantless search of the backyard violat
• Guilfoyle v. Missouri
  812 F.2d 1290· 10th Cir.· 1987-02-27 ·cited 32×
• Bickford v. Int'l Speedway Corp.
  654 F.2d 1028· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-31 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the district court erred in directing a verdict for the defendant, as factual issues regarding the victim's status, proximate causation, and willful/wanton conduct should have been submitted to the jury.
• First Healthcare Corp. v. Hamilton
  740 So. 2d 1189· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-06-30 ·cited 30×
  A nursing home resident died after wandering from the facility into a pond due to inadequate supervision. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed a jury verdict imposing compensatory and punitive damages against the nursing home and its administrator, but vacated the award f
• Brown v. Missouri Pacific Railroad
  703 F.2d 1050· 8th Cir.· 1983-04-01 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support an award of punitive damages.
• Hirst v. Gertzen
  676 F.2d 1252· 9th Cir.· 1982-05-10 ·cited 29×
  The majority opinion reversed the trial court's decision, allowing evidence of a deputy sheriff's prior acts to be admissible for proving gross negligence and proximate cause in a civil rights action, despite the dissenting judge's view that such evidence was irrelevant and preju
• Carter v. Lake Wales Hosp. Ass'n, Inc.
  213 So. 2d 898· Fla. 2d DCA· 1968-09-18 ·cited 29×
  This case addresses whether parents can recover damages for emotional distress when their newborn was mistakenly discharged from a hospital to a third party and returned hours later with no physical injury to mother or child. The court affirms dismissal, holding that Florida law
• Harper v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.
  741 F.2d 87· 5th Cir.· 1984-09-07 ·cited 28×
  The dissenting judge believes the jury's award for lost wages was excessive and unrealistic, leading to an unfair result.
• In re OIL Spill BY the "Amoco Cadiz" OFF the Coast OF France March 16 v. Bugsier Reederei AND Bergungs
  659 F.2d 789· 7th Cir.· 1981-09-15 ·cited 27×
  The court held that tort claims arising out of or related to a salvage operation are arbitrable under the Lloyd's Standard Form of Salvage Agreement, even if the alleged torts occurred before the agreement was finalized or salvage began.
• Henley v. Carter
  63 So. 2d 192· Fla.· 1953-02-17 ·cited 27×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that contributory negligence is a valid defense in Guest Statute personal injury actions, even though the statute requires proof of 'gross negligence' and 'willful and wanton misconduct.' A guest who voluntarily rides with an intoxicated driver may
• De Wald v. Quarnstrom
  60 So. 2d 919· Fla.· 1952-07-15 ·cited 27×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision that a guest passenger's amended declaration did not sufficiently allege gross negligence by the host driver to state a cause of action under a statute limiting guest passenger recovery. The court clarified that "gross n
• Iligan Integrated Steel Mills, Inc. v. SS John Weyerhaeuser
  507 F.2d 68· 2d Cir.· 1974-12-03 ·cited 26×
  The court held that gross negligence or wilful misconduct in tendering an unseaworthy ship does not constitute an "unreasonable deviation" that would void the liability limitations under COGSA § 4(5).
• Royce D. Johnson v. Rinesmith
  238 So. 2d 659· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-12-17 ·cited 26×
  The court granted a rehearing, holding that contributory negligence is not a defense to willful and wanton misconduct and that the issue was not foreclosed by pretrial proceedings, thus entitling the appellants to a new trial limited to that issue.