MICHAEL KACZMAREK, APPELLANT,
v.
MICHAEL BRIAN KELLY, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed that a vehicle owner/bailor's negligence as a passenger should not be imputed to the driver in a suit between the two parties, distinguishing third-party cases under respondeat superior.
A driver's negligence should not be imputed to the owner/bailor of a vehicle who was injured as a passenger in a lawsuit brought by the owner against the driver.
[1] A driver's negligence is not imputed to a vehicle owner or bailor who sues the driver for injuries sustained as a passenger, as the doctrine of respondeat superior applie…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKaczmarek drove a dune buggy that he owned or leased to Kelly; Kelly was injured while riding as a passenger in the vehicle and sued Kaczmarek for neg…
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 Third-Party Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
SHARP, Judge.
Kaczmarek appeals from a partial summary judgment entered in favor of Kelly, the plaintiff below.1 The trial court ruled that Kaczmarek’s negligence as the driver of a dune buggy, which injured Kelly while he was a passenger in the vehicle, should not be imputed to Kelly in his suit against Kaczmarek, merely because Kelly was the lessee or bailor of the buggy. We agree and affirm.
In Weber v. Porco, 100 So. 2d 146 (Fla.1958), the Florida Supreme Court applied the doctrine respondeat superior in holding that the negligence of the driver of a car can be imputed to its owner who was riding therein as a passenger, in a lawsuit involving a third party. The court reasoned that it is a matter of “simple logic,” id. at 148, to impute a driver’s negligence to the owner of an automobile in the context of a third party’s suit against the owner, as well as the owner’s claim against a third party. But in this case, there is no third party.
We think this case is controlled by Hale v. Adams, 117 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960). The court applied the general rule in Florida that principals may sue their agents for negligent acts done pursuant to an agency relationship. Accordingly, it held that a driver’s negligence would not be imputed to the owner of a car who was injured while riding as a passenger, in a lawsuit brought by the owner against the driver. There is even less reason to impute the negligence of a driver to a bailor-lessee.
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH, J., concurs.
COWART, J., concurs specially with opinion.
. This is an appealable non-final order. Fla.R. App.P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv).
COWART, Judge,
concurring specially:
I concur. One who leases a motor vehicle, and rides as a passenger with a driver he has placed in control, can recover from the driver for injuries he receives as a result of the driver’s negligence.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Clauson, 511 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…n uninsured motor vehicle. .Of course, the driver’s negligence is not imputed to the owner-or-bailee-passenger in an action by the latter directly against the actively negligent driver. Weber v. Porco, 100 So. 2d 146 (Fla.1958); Kaczmarek v. Kelly, 479 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Hale v. Adams, 117 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960). Unfortunately, the immunity doctrine serves that purpose in this case. . If we are wrong about this, we disagree with Toner.…
-
Coniglio v. Nat'l CAR Rental Sys., Inc., 541 So. 2d 1367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…e (which we do not here decide) this would not automatically entitle the driver, defendant Loeber, to a summary judgment. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Clauson, 511 So. 2d 1085 at 1086 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Kaczmarek v. Kelly, 479 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Hale v. Adams, 117 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960).…
Authorities Cited
- Weber v. Porco, 100 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 1958)
- Hale v. Olvalene H. Adams, 117 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960)