SHARYN ZIMMERMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
JEFFREY ZIMMERMAN AND NATIONWIDE MUTUAL 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.
Interspousal immunity bars automobile negligence claims even if the defendant spouse has liability insurance.
This case involves an automobile negligence claim between spouses. The defendant spouse was covered by liability insurance.…
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 Parental Immunity cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
In accordance with Raisen v. Raisen, 379 So. 2d 352 (Fla.1979), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 886, 101 S.Ct. 240, 66 L.Ed.2d 111 (1980), which we think remains viable, see Burgess v. Burgess, 447 So. 2d 220 (Fla.1984); Hill v. Hill, 415 So. 2d 20 (Fla.1982), and which is therefore binding, Hoffman v. Jones, 280 So. 2d 431 (Fla.1973), we hold, affirming the trial court, that interspousal immunity bars the maintenance of an automobile negligence case notwithstanding that the defendant spouse is covered by liability insurance.
Although we thus do not follow the contrary language in Tubbs v. Dressier, 419 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), affirmed on other grounds, 435 So. 2d 792 (Fla.1983), we do agree that the issue is appropriate for reconsideration by the Supreme Court in the light of Ard v. Ard, 414 So. 2d 1066 (Fla.1982), in which the court held that parental immunity was inapplicable when insurance was available. Consequently, as in Tubbs, we certify to the Supreme Court of Florida that this decision passes upon the following question of great public importance:
Is the doctrine of interspousal immunity, like the doctrine of parental immunity, waived to the extent of available liability insurance, when the action is for a negligent tort?
Affirmed, question certified.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ernestine Chatmon v. Milford Woodard, 492 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…s the course of action required under the circumstances by the controlling case of Gaston v. Pittman, 224 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 1969). Affirmed. . See Snowten v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 475 So. 2d 1211 (Fla.1985); Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 447 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), approved, 478 So. 2d 350 (Fla.1985). . It may have been appropriate to have conditioned permitting the amendment upon the defendant’s payment of the additional costs and expenses incurred by the plaintiff as a result of the appa…
-
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Clauson, 511 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…789 (distinguishing Toner). Here, it is stipulated that the vehicle was, in fact, “given” to the injured plaintiff who therefore has no valid claim against the owner or, as a result, under UM against State Farm. Reversed. . Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 447 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), aff'd, 478 So. 2d 350 (Fla.1985). It is undisputed that this doctrine bars Mrs. Clauson's claim against her husband. . The UM policy provides, in pertinent part: We will pay damages for bodily injury an insured is legally entitl…
-
Sharyn Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 478 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 1985)…BOYD, Chief Justice. This cause is before the Court on petition for review of the decision in Zimmerman v. Zimmerman, 447 So. 2d 1019 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). The district court of appeal certified that its decision passed upon a question of great public importance, thus giving this court jurisdiction to consider the petition for review. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. The question cer…
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
- Hoffman v. Jones, 280 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 1973)
- Raisen v. Raisen, 379 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 1979)
- ARD v. Douglas Perry ARD Ad Litem for Benji Dwain Clary, 414 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 1982)
- Sheilah Kristine Hill v. Hill, 415 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1982)
- Raisen v. Raisen, 449 U.S. 886 (U.S. 1980)
- Whisenhunt v. Georgia, 449 U.S. 886 (U.S. 1980)
- Dressler v. Tubbs, 435 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 1983)
- Tubbs v. Dressler, 419 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Burgess v. Foster F. Burgess, 447 So. 2d 220 (Fla. 1984)