JOHN R. BONA, APPELLANT,
v.
PEOPLES GAS SYSTEM, INC., MORCHEM RESOURCES, INC., AND HARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEMNITY 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.
The court held that disputed issues of material fact exist regarding the agency relationship between the waste generator and transporter, and whether the waste was hazardous, precluding summary judgment for those parties. The court also held that the landowner was not a third-party beneficiary of the performance bond.
[1] A contract provision allowing one party to approve the destination or site of waste disposal may be interpreted as establishing an agency relationship, creating a questio…
[2] The determination of whether waste deposited on property is "hazardous" under applicable laws, and whether its improper disposal creates a strict liability exception to t…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA landowner sued a waste generator and transporter for damages and removal of waste from his property. The landowner also sued the transporter's insur…
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 Independent Contractor Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This case involves a landowner, John R. Bona, who brought suit for damages and the removal of waste from his property. Bona appeals the summary judgment in favor of the generator of the waste, Peoples Gas System Inc. [PGS], and one of the transporters of the waste, Morchem Resources, Inc. [Morchem], Bona also appeals the summary judgment in favor of Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company [Hartford], the insurance company that wrote the performance bond for Morchem.
We reverse the summary judgments entered in favor of PGS and Mor-chem because several disputed issues of material fact exist on this record. Among those issues, .is the question of whether an agency relationship existed between PGS and Morchem. Here, the contract between PGS and Morchem provided that PGS was to approve the “destination or site” of the waste. This contract provision is one of the factors which might either be interpreted as establishing an agency relationship between PGS and Morchem, or be interpreted as establishing an independent contractor relationship. Because the evidence here is susceptible to more than one interpretation, the question of whether an agency relationship exists is a matter for the jury to determine. Folwell v. Bernard, 477 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Jaar v. University of Miami, 474 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Amerven, Inc. v. Abbadie, 238 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970).
An issue of fact also exists as to whether the waste deposited on Bona’s property is actually “hazardous” waste under the ap plicable laws, and if so, whether the improper disposal of “hazardous” waste creates a strict liability exception to the insulation from liability that one or more of the parties might otherwise enjoy pursuant to the independent contractor doctrine.
Finally, we affirm the summary judgment in favor of Hartford. The lower court correctly held that Bona was not a third party beneficiary of the performance bond and thus could not maintain an action against Hartford on the bond.
Reversed in part, affirmed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Overseas Private Inv. Corp. v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9823 (S.D. Fla. 1993)…Dist.1992). Where the evidence concerning the existence of an agency relationship is susceptible to more than one interpretation, the question whether such a relationship exists must be submitted to the jury. Bona v. Peoples Gas System, Inc., 557 So.2d 581 (Fla.App. 3rd Dist.1989). Dade County urges that Plaintiffs presented insufficient evidence that it exercised control over Conservation District to warrant submission of the agency question to the jury. , A review of the evidence reveals that, w…
Authorities Cited
- Jaar v. The Univ. OF Miami, 474 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Folwell v. Bernard, 477 So. 2d 1060 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Amerven, Inc. v. Abbadie, 238 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)