BARBARA ARMSTRONG AND DONALD E. ARMSTRONG, SR., APPELLANTS,
v.
MUNFORD, INC., APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1983-10-28
No. 83-643
HOBSON, A.C.J., and SCHEB, J., concur.
439 So. 2d 1009 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1983) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

The Armstrongs sued a beer vendor for injuries from an automobile accident caused by a minor who purchased beer from the vendor in violation of Florida law. The court affirmed summary judgment for the vendor, holding that section 768.125 requires a willful violation of the statute to establish liability to third parties, and no such willfulness was alleged or proven.


Holding

The court affirmed summary judgment for the vendor, holding that section 768.125 established the requisites for a cause of action by an injured third party arising from a violation of section 562.11(1)(a), and that the statute requires the selling or furnishing of alcohol to be done 'willfully.' Since there were neither allegations nor proof of willful sale, no cause of action existed.


Headnotes

[1] A cause of action by an injured third party against a vendor of alcoholic beverages requires compliance with the requisites established by statute.

[2] A statute requiring the willful and unlawful sale or furnishing of alcoholic beverages to a minor is necessary to establish liability for injuries caused by the minor's i…

Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“By enacting section 768.125, the legislature established the requisites of a cause of action by an injured third person arising out of circumstances which are violative of section 562.11(l)(a). Section 768.-125 requires that the selling or furnishing of the alcoholic beverage must be done "willfully."”

Establishes that section 768.125 modified prior law and requires willful conduct for third-party liability

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Barbara and Donald Armstrong were injured in an automobile accident allegedly caused by a minor who had consumed beer sold to him by Munford, Inc. 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.


Opinion of the Court
LEHAN, Judge.

LEHAN, Judge.

This is a personal injury action against a vendor of alcoholic beverages arising out of an automobile accident. The Arm-strongs, appellants, claim that appellee sold alcoholic beverages (beer) to a minor who consumed the beer and then caused the accident which injured Mrs. Armstrong. This case involves provisions of section 562.-ll(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), which read:

It is unlawful for any person to sell, give, serve, or permit to be served alcoholic beverages to a person under 19 years of age. .. . Anyone convicted of violation of the provisions hereof shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree punishable as provided in S. 775.082 or S. 775.083,

and provisions of section 768.125, Florida Statutes (1981), which read:

A person who sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person of lawful drinking age shall not thereby become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such person, except that a person who willfully and unlawfully sells or furnishes alcoholic beverages to a person who is not of lawful drinking age ... may become liable for injury or damage caused by or resulting from the intoxication of such minor or person.

The appellants’ complaint alleged a cause of action under only section 562.11(l)(a) and not under section 768.125, although the latter statute was in effect at the time of the accident. The trial court granted appellee’s motion for summary judgment on the authority of Migliore v. Crown Liquors of Broward, Inc., 425 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), cert. granted, (No. 63,337, 1983), which held that a vendor who sells alcoholic beverages to a minor in violation of section 562.11 is not liable to third persons injured by the intoxicated minor’s operation of a motor vehicle. See also Barber v. Jensen, 428 So. 2d 770 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), cert. granted (No. 63,598, 1983), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal certified the question of whether, prior to the effective date of section 768.125, a third party had a cause of action against a person who furnished alcoholic beverages to a minor in violation of section 562.11.

We affirm. By enacting section 768.125, the legislature established the requisites of a cause of action by an injured third person arising out of circumstances which are violative of section 562.11(l)(a). Section 768.-125 requires that the selling or furnishing of the alcoholic beverage must be done “willfully.” In this case there were neither allegations nor proof of a willful sale by appellee of alcoholic beverages to a minor. Appellants argue that they stated a cause of action under section 562.11(l)(a) by merely alleging a violation of that statute, citing Prevatt v. McClennan, 201 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967). However, Prevatt was decided before the enactment of section 768.-125.

We certify the following question to the Florida Supreme Court as being of great public importance:

Does a third party have a cause of action against the dispenser of alcoholic beverages for injuries caused by a minor when the alcoholic beverages were furnished in violation of section 562.11(l)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), notwithstanding the enactment of section 768.125, Florida Statutes (1981).

AFFIRMED.

HOBSON, A.C.J., and SCHEB, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Armstrong v. Munford, Inc., 451 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 1984)
    …. ALDERMAN, Chief Justice. We accept jurisdiction to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Second [*481] District, in Armstrong v. Munford, Inc., 439 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), wherein that court has certified the following question as being of great public importance: Does a third party have a cause of action against the dispenser of alcoholic beverages for injuries caused by a minor when the alcoholi…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw