STEVEN J. KROUSE, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF JEFFREY B. KROUSE, A MINOR, DECEASED, APPELLANT,
v.
AVIS RENT-A-CAR SYSTEM, INC., ETC., DAVID SIGNORE, NANCY SIGNORE, ET AL., 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.
In this wrongful death case, the appellate court affirmed summary judgment for the defendants (Avis Rent-A-Car and the driver David Signore) where the plaintiff's vehicle suddenly swerved into the defendant's lane and caused a fatal collision. The court held that only speculative, not genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the defendant could have avoided the accident.
The court held that no genuine issues of material fact existed because the defendant was driving within the speed limit in his own lane when suddenly struck, and the record contained only speculation—not evidence—that the defendant could have avoided the accident regardless of his speed. The trial court properly denied the rehearing motion because the supporting affidavit was untimely and speculative.
[1] Summary judgment is proper when the record raises only speculative, rather than genuine, issues of material fact.
[2] Evidence that a vehicle swerved into the opposing lane of travel, resulting in a collision, does not raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding the other driver's a…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“The Signore vehicle was traveling within the speed limit in its lane of travel and was suddenly struck nearly head-on by a car coming in the opposite direction; nothing in this record remotely suggests that Signore could have done anything to avoid this accident.”
Establishes the core holding that the defendant had no duty or ability to avoid the collision given the sudden nature of the plaintiff's vehicle's crossing into his lane.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn August 24, 1980, David Signore was driving a rented Avis vehicle within the speed limit in his lane on State Road 60 in Polk County, Florida. The p…
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 Genuine Issue Of Material Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
After carefully considering the record and briefs in this wrongful death case, we conclude that the trial court committed no error in (1) entering the final summary judgment under review in favor of the defendant David Signore and the defendant Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., and (2) subsequently denying the plaintiff Steven J. Krouse’s petition for rehearing. We reach this conclusion for two reasons.
First, we are convinced that only speculative, rather than genuine, issues of material fact are raised by this record. The evidence is undisputed that on August 24, 1980, the defendant David Signore was operating a motor vehicle, which he had rented from the defendant Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc.; he was driving within the speed limit in his lane of travel on state road 60 in Polk County, Florida. A motor vehicle, in which the plaintiff’s decedent was riding as a passenger, was traveling in the opposite direction in the adjoining lane, on the same highway. The plaintiff’s vehicle, without dispute, suddenly swerved into the lane of travel of the defendant David Signore, resulting almost immediately in the fatal automobile collision herein.
The plaintiff’s decedent argues that genuine issues of material fact are raised as to whether the defendant David Signore had sufficient time to avoid the accident in question. The driver of the motor vehicle who was traveling behind the Signore vehi cle estimates that it took, at most, from five to ten seconds for the plaintiff vehicle to show signs of losing control and then come across to the wrong side of the road. Even if correct, it is pure speculation to conclude that the Signore vehicle could have done anything during that time to avoid the collision. The arguments made by the plaintiffs decedent that perhaps the Signore vehicle was traveling too fast under existing weather conditions and that perhaps he might have had enough time to avoid the accident had he not been traveling at that rate of speed are also pure conjecture. The Signore vehicle was traveling within the speed limit in its lane of travel and was suddenly struck nearly head-on by a car coming in the opposite direction; nothing in this record remotely suggests that Signore could have done anything to avoid this accident. See Rawls v. Zeigler, 107 So. 2d 601, 608 (Fla.1958); Johnson v. Gulf Life Insurance Co., 429 So. 2d 744, 746 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Colon v. Lara, 389 So. 2d 1070, 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); compare Lee v. Dunnigan, 384 So. 2d 165, 166 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980) (positive testimony of twenty to thirty seconds reaction time under similar conditions raises a genuine issue of fact).
Second, we think the trial court was well within its discretion in denying the plaintiffs motion for rehearing and in rejecting the affidavit filed in connection therewith. The affidavit was untimely filed and was, in any event, entirely speculative. The trial court therefore committed no error in denying the petition for rehearing. See Coffman Realty, Inc. v. Tosohatchee Game Preserve, Inc., 413 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1982), adopting, 381 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Stolzenberg v. Forte Towers South, Inc., 430 So. 2d 558, 559 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Morgan v. Continental Casualty Co., 382 So. 2d 351, 353 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Gulewicz v. Cziesla, 366 So. 2d 507, 508 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). The final summary judgment under review is in all respects
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cordon v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc., 559 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. North Broward Hosp. Dist. v. Royster, 544 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Krouse v. Avis Rent-a-Car Sys., Inc., 459 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).…
-
de Alejo v. State, 462 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Krouse v. Avis Rent-A-Car System, 459 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).…
-
McFADDEN v. Ronchetto, 485 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Krouse v. Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc., 459 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Hormovitis v. Mutual Lumber Company, 120 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960).…
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 (11 total)
- Coffman Realty, Inc. v. Tosohatchee Game Preserve, Inc., 413 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982)
- McArthur Breedlove v. State, 413 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1982)
- Sarron v. Barbel I. Sarron, 429 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Coffman Realty, Inc. v. Tosohatchee Game Preserve, Inc., 381 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Rawls v. Ziegler, 107 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 1958)
- Stolzenberg v. Forte Towers S., Inc., 430 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Patience R. Morgan v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 382 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Riguard Colon v. Serafín Lara and Carmen Lara, 389 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Stewart v. Stewart, 389 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Gulewicz v. Cziesla, 366 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)