JEANETTE JOHNSON AND FELIX JOHNSON, APPELLANTS,
v.
SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, ETC., 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.
Parents of a deceased child sued the school board for wrongful death under Florida law. The school board sought contribution against the parents based on their comparative negligence, and the trial court awarded contribution. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act applies because the parents sued in their own right as survivors, not derivatively on behalf of the deceased child.
The court held that family immunity does not bar contribution and that the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act applies. Because the parents sued in their own right under the wrongful death statute and not on behalf of the child, the exception to contribution established in Joseph v. Quest does not apply, and the parents must contribute according to their comparative negligence.
[1] The doctrine of family immunity does not bar a contribution claim by one tortfeasor against the parent of a deceased minor when the wrongful death suit is brought by the…
[2] The Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act overrides the common law doctrine of inter-spousal immunity when one tortfeasor seeks contribution from the tortfeaso…
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“To say that each parent does not have to contribute and account for his or her share of the wrongdoing to the other parent would be unfair to the school board and a windfall to each appellant.”
Establishes the court's rationale that fairness and equity require parents to contribute according to their comparative negligence in a suit brought in their own right.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA minor child died in an accident involving the school board. The parents filed a wrongful death action under Florida's wrongful death statute in thei…
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 Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, Judge.
The parents of a deceased minor appeal from a contribution award in favor of the defendant school board. The contribution order was based on a jury verdict finding each plaintiff-parent 20% negligent in the accident. The trial court, on the contribution claim by the school board, reasoned that each parent, in addition to being 20% comparatively negligent on his or her own claim, was also 20% responsible for contribution on the claim of the other parent.
The appellants contend that the doctrine of family immunity bars the school board from seeking contribution. See Joseph v. Quest, 414 So. 2d 1063 (Fla.1982) (where child, or someone on behalf of child, recovers, contribution is available against the parent only to the extent of insurance coverage). See also Woods v. Withrow, 413 So. 2d 1179 (Fla.1982). Here, there was no insurance coverage.
However, in this case suit was instituted by the appellants in their own right under section 768.21, Florida Statutes, (wrongful death statute) and not on behalf of the child. Therefore, Joseph v. Quest is not controlling because the injuries claimed were not those of the deceased child but of the parents as survivors.
In Shor v. Paoli, 353 So. 2d 825 (Fla.1977), affirming, 345 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), the supreme court recognized that the common law doctrine of inter-spousal immunity did not control over section 768.31, Florida Statutes, the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act, where one tortfeasor seeks contribution from the tortfeasor-spouse of the injured person. See also Florida Farm Bureau Ins. Co. v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 387 So. 2d 932 (Fla.1980).
In Shor, the court quoted approvingly from the opinion of this court in which it was said, “To say that Shor doesn’t have to contribute and account for her wrongdoing would be unfair to Paoli and a windfall to Shor.” Id. at 826. Similarly here, to say that each parent does not have to contribute and account for his or her share of the wrongdoing to the other parent would be unfair to the school board and a windfall to each appellant. Although the appellants are not insured, it is clear that there is no insurance requirement in Shor as there is in Joseph. We find no indication in Joseph of any intent to depart from the general rule established in Shor with respect to interspousal immunity. Rather, in Joseph the court simply elected, for the sound policy reasons expressed, not to extend the Shor principles to parent-child family immunity, except to the extent of insurance coverage.
It is clear that none of the policy reasons distinguishing Joseph from Shor are applicable here. Further, in Florida Farm Bureau Ins. Co. v. Government Employees Ins. Co., the Supreme Court determined that the existence of insurance coverage is not a factor in a contribution claim against the spouse of the injured party.
THE FINAL JUDGMENT IS THEREFORE AFFIRMED.
DELL and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gurney v. Winton Ray Cain & Tena Cain & Bulldog Fence Co., 588 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…he Gurneys, because the jury determined that the Gurneys were only one third at fault. Then, appellees contend that, because of the contribution among joint tort-feasor statute and this court’s decision in Johnson v. School Bd. of Palm Beach County, 537 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989), Mr. Cain’s award is reduced again because of the Gurneys’ entitlement to contribution on Mrs. Cain’s award because of Mr. Cain’s negligence. Thus, Mr. Cain’s award is reduced by another two-thirds to make the net award to Mr. Ca…1 / 2
-
Hudson v. Moss, 653 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…n claim for a child’s damages against a negligent parent only to the extent of the parent’s liability insurance. See 414 So. 2d at 1065. We agree with the extension of Joseph v. Quest that was adopted by the Fourth District in Johnson v. School Bd., 537 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). In Johnson v. School Bd., the Fourth District held that parent/child immunity was not applicable to a contribution claim because the child was deceased, and the parents were suing for their own damages as survivors. See 537 So.…
-
Int'l Action Sports, Inc. v. Sabellico, 573 So. 2d 928 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…in tort for the same injury to person or property, or for the same wrongful death, there is a right of contribution among them even though judgment has not been recovered against all or any of them. . See Johnson v. School Bd. of Palm Beach County, 537 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Chinos Villas, Inc. v. Bermudez, 448 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Quest v. Joseph, 392 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), quashed in part, 414 So. 2d 1063 (Fla.1982); Alves v. Adler Built Industs., 366 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 197…
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
- Shor v. Paoli, 353 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 1977)
- Fla. Farm Bureau Ins. Co. v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co., 387 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1980)
- Joseph v. Quest, 414 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 1982)
- Paoli v. Shor, 345 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Woods v. Withrow, 413 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 1982)