KATHERAN M. MCCARROLL, APPELLANT,
v.
MARY REAGAN, STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY, SANDRA SMITH KEY, AND ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES
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 fellow employee immunity statute was constitutional and applicable, barring the plaintiff's tort claim.
Plaintiff was a passenger injured in an accident caused by a fellow employee driving the car. The defendant employee was acting in furtherance of the …
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 Furtherance Of Employer'S Business cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff Katheran M. McCarroll appeals a final summary judgment entered against her in her suit for damages for personal injuries she sustained in an automobile accident in which she was a passenger in an automobile driven by defendant/appellee Mary Reagan, one of appellant’s fellow employees. We affirm.
The issues on this appeal concern the constitutionality and applicability of section 440.11(1), Florida Statutes (1979). That section provides immunity from tort liability to a fellow employee when that employee was acting in furtherance of the employer’s business except when the employee was acting with gross negligence or willful and wanton disregard of the interests of the victim or when the victim and fellow employee were assigned primarily to unrelated work.
Section 440.11(1) has recently been held constitutional by our supreme court. Iglesia v. Floran, 394 So. 2d 994 (Fla.1981). Furthermore, the trial court correctly found, after considering the facts in the light most favorable to appellant, that section 440.11(1) was applicable to this case and that there was no genuine issue of material fact that would bring this case within any of the exceptions set forth in the statute.
Accordingly, the final summary judgment is AFFIRMED.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and BOARD-MAN and CAMPBELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
John Weller and his wife v. Reitz, 419 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)…the employee was acting with gross negligence or willful and wanton disregard of the interests of the victim or when the victim and fellow employee were assigned primarily to unrelated works within private or public employment. McCarroll v. Reagan, 396 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). Section 440.-11 does not abrogate a cause of action for gross negligence. Iglesia v. Floran, 394 So. 2d 994 (Fla.1981). Appellant’s affidavit in opposition to the motion for summary judgment stated that appellee Reitz told appel…
-
Abraham v. Dzafic, 666 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…ent, both Abraham and Dzafic were traveling employees, “deemed to be in-the continuous conduct of [the] employer’s business.” Leonard v. Dennis, 465 So. 2d 538, 540 (Fla. 2d DCA), rev. denied, 476 So. 2d 673 (Fla.1985). See also McCarroll v. Reagan, 396 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). The trial court might have concluded that co-employee immunity was not applicable because Abraham and Dzafic were “assigned primarily to unrelated works.” Nothing in the facts we have considered suggests that such is the case, h…
Authorities Cited
- Iglesia v. Floran, 394 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 1981)