IRWIN SLITKIN, APPELLANT,
v.
AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the plaintiff bears the burden of proving the owner's consent for the vehicle's operation, and failure to do so warrants a directed verdict for the owner.
An Avis rental car crashed into the plaintiff's house and car, driven by an unknown individual who fled the scene. The plaintiff sued Avis for damages…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Owner Liability For Vehicle Operation cases and more on FLexlaw
PEARSON, DANIEL, Judge.
An automobile admittedly owned by Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. (Avis) crashed into Mr. Slitkin’s house and his car parked in the driveway. The offending vehicle remained, but the unidentified driver chose not to and fled.
Slitkin sued Avis for damages alleging that the Avis automobile was operated by its authorized agent and with its consent.1 Avis denied this.
At trial Slitkin proved only the occurrence of the accident and the damage which ensued: No proof was submitted to show that the unknown driver was operating the Avis vehicle as its agent or with its consent. The trial court directed a verdict in favor of Avis.
While the owner of an automobile is liable for the negligent operation of the automobile by a person driving it with the owner’s knowledge and consent, the burden of proving such knowledge and consent is upon the plaintiff.2 Pearson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co., 187 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966). Slitkin failed to satisfy this burden.
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
. The plaintiff neither alleged nor proved that Avis’ responsibility stemmed from circumstances such as leaving the vehicle unattended with the key to the ignition in the vehicle. See, e. g., Vining v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 354 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 1978).
. Plaintiff’s argument that the burden is upon the defendant to establish that the vehicle was being operated without its consent comes thirteen years too late. Former Section 51.12, Florida Statutes, which made non-consent an affirmative defense, was repealed by Chapter 67-254, § 49, Laws of Florida.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marlin v. AVIS Rent A CAR Sys., Inc., 505 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Slitkin v. Avis Rent a Car System, Inc., 382 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Pearson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 187 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966).…
-
Commercial Carrier Corp. v. S. J. G. Corp., 409 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)…ation of the dangerous instrumentality doctrine is that the owner of the automobile has authorized its use by another person. The burden of proving the knowledge and consent of the owner is on the plaintiff, Slitkin v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc., 382 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Pearson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co., 187 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966), and a species of conversion or theft will relieve an owner of responsibility for the use of an automobile under the dangerous instrumentality do…
-
Dockery v. Enter. Rent-A-Car Co., 796 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…onsent. The burden of proof that the vehicle was being operated with the consent of the owner has always been on the plaintiff. Pearson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 187 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966); Slitkin v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc., 382 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The form complaint provided in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure form 1.945 contains a provision for plaintiff to allege the motor vehicle was operated with the consent of the owner, and the complaint in this case contains that all…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Vining v. AVIS Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc., 354 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 1977)
- Pearson v. ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 187 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966)