KEY BISCAYNE DIVERS, INC. AND ART LEVINE, APPELLANTS,
v.
MARINE STADIUM ENTERPRISES, INC., D/B/A KEY MARINA, 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.
Key Biscayne Divers sought damages for a destroyed vessel stored at Marine Stadium's marina, claiming an exculpatory clause in the storage agreement was unenforceable because it relieved the bailee of liability for its own negligence and violated public policy. The court affirmed the enforceability of the exculpatory clause, holding that such provisions are valid when the contract is between parties of equal bargaining power and the language is clear and unambiguous.
The exculpatory clause is enforceable and does not violate public policy. Contractual provisions seeking exculpation for ordinary negligence have been upheld as not violative of public policy where the contract is between persons of equal bargaining power and the provisions are clear and unambiguous.
[1] Exculpatory clauses in contracts are enforceable and not void as against public policy when the contract is between parties of equal bargaining power and the provisions a…
[2] A party may contractually release a bailee from liability for ordinary negligence in connection with the storage of property.
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“Contractual provisions by which a party seeks exculpation for his own negligence, although not favored in the law, have been upheld as not violative of public policy where the contract is between persons of equal bargaining power and the provisions are clear and unambiguous.”
Establishes the legal standard for enforceability of exculpatory clauses in negligence cases
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant stored a commercial diving vessel at appellee's marina during the off-season under a storage agreement containing an exculpatory clause. 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 Bailee Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff/appellant1 contends that an exculpatory clause in a boat storage agreement does not relieve a bailee from responsibility for its own negligence and that such a provision is void as a matter of public policy. We disagree and affirm.
Appellee owned the marina where appellant stored his commercial vessel during the off-season. The boat, used for diving, was destroyed when the rack where it was housed collapsed after a rain storm. Appellant was reimbursed for the full value of the hull by his own insurer but claims here an entitlement to other unspecified consequential damages as well.
The storage agreement in question provides in clear and unequivocal language:
The owner for himself, ... hereby releases and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the company ... for any and all liability for personal injury, loss of life and property damage: (1) arising out of the ordinary negligence of the company or its employees and agents in connection with the Company’s premises or the use of the storage space; (2) in connection with the Owner’s boat, motor and accessories while it is on the premises ...; (3) for loss or damage to the Owner’s boat, motor and accessories or contents thereof due to fire, theft, vandalism, collision, marina equipment failure, windstorm, rain, hurricane or other casualty loss.
Elsewhere in the agreement it is expressly provided that the services contemplated are “limited to providing a storage space” according to the terms of the contract.
Contractual provisions by which a party seeks exculpation for his own negligence, although not favored in the law, have been upheld as not violative of public policy where the contract is between persons of equal bargaining power and the provisions are clear and unambiguous. Mankap Enterprises, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Alarm. Services, 427 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Ivey Plants, Inc. v. FMC Corp., 282 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), cert. denied, 289 So. 2d 731 (Fla.1974). Similarly we have, in a line of burglar alarm cases, upheld exculpatory clauses against claims for consequential losses based on breach of contract and gross negligence. Continental Video Corp. v. Honeywell, Inc., 422 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 456 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 1982); Ace Formal Wear, Inc. v. Baker Protective Service Inc., 416 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The only other instance, so far, where public policy has voided an exculpatory clause is where a party sought to be exempted for his own intentional tort. Mankap.
The appellee demonstrated conclusively that there were no public policy factors which precluded enforcement of the storage agreement’s exculpatory provisions and that a summary judgment on the question was proper. Affirmed.
. Art Levine joined in this appeal on the side of Key Biscayne Divers, Inc. without filing a separate brief.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hardage Enters., Inc. v. Fidesys Corp., N.V., 570 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…Ivey Plants, Inc. v. FMC Corp., 282 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973), cert. denied, 289 So. 2d 731 (Fla. 1974); O’Connell v. Walt Disney World Co., 413 So. 2d 444 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); and Key Biscayne Divers, Inc. v. Marine Stadium Enterprises, Inc., 490 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). The University Plaza case is readily distinguishable because it dealt with an indemnification agreement rather than an exculpatory release. In the instant case, of course, we are concerned only with the latter. The distinction w…
-
Jameson Cooper v. Meridian Yachts, Ltd., 575 F.3d 1151 (11th Cir. 2009)…ough not favored in the law, have been upheld as not violative of public policy where the contract is between persons of equal bargaining power and the provisions are clear and unambiguous.” Key Biscayne Divers, Inc. v. Marine Stadium Enters., Inc., 490 So. 2d 137, 138 (Fla.App.Dist.Ct.1986). The limitation of liability provision is "clear and unambiguous,” and there is no evidence suggesting that Meridian and De Vries did not have equal bargaining power. . Lauritzen involved an action brought by a foreign sa…
-
Pier 1 Cruise Experts v. Revelex Corp., 929 F.3d 1334 (11th Cir. 2019)…ntracting parties have equal bargaining power and (2) the clause's provisions are clear and unambiguous, see Cooper v. Meridian Yachts, Ltd., 575 F.3d 1151, 1168 n.9 (11th Cir. 2009) (citing Key Biscayne Divers, Inc. v. Marine Stadium Enters., Inc., 490 So. 2d 137, 138 (Fla. 3d Dist. Ct. App. 1986)). With respect to the latter requirement, "the intention to be relieved from liability [must be] made clear and unequivocal and the wording must be so clear and understandable that an ordinary and knowledgeable per…
Authorities Cited
- Ivey Plants, Inc. v. FMC Corp., 282 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973)
- Mankap Enters., Inc. v. Wells Fargo Alarm Servs., 427 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- ACE Formal Wear, Inc. v. Baker Protective Serv., Inc., 416 So. 2d 8 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Simonet v. Simonet, 289 So. 2d 731 (Fla. 1974)
- Stella v. Craine, 289 So. 2d 731 (Fla. 1974)
- Cont'l Video Corp. v. Honeywell, Inc., 422 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- State v. Ferris, 422 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)
- THE Florida BAR v. POE, 456 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 1984)