GLORIA ANDERSON, APPELLANT,
v.
CHARLES K. CANNON, MACK Y. POOLE, CAROL L. POOLE, MIKE FULFORD AND HARTFORD INSURANCE 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 affirmed summary judgment for vehicle owners where the driver operated their vehicle without permission, holding that the owners established lack of consent as a matter of law and the plaintiff failed to produce evidence of a genuine issue of material fact.
Vehicle owners are entitled to summary judgment on the issue of consent when they establish that the driver operated their vehicle without permission and the plaintiff produces insufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact.
[1] Vehicle owners who establish that a driver operated their vehicle without permission shift the burden to the plaintiff to produce evidence of a genuine issue of material…
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 intelligenceCharles K. Cannon allegedly caused a collision with plaintiff's vehicle while driving a vehicle owned by Carol and Mack Poole. The Pooles claimed Cann…
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 Vicarious Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In Case # 88-2246-CA (trial court docket number), the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants Carol and Mack Poole on the ground that the evidence established that at the time that Charles K. Cannon allegedly caused a collision with the vehicle driven by plaintiff/appellant while driving a vehicle owned by the Pooles, he was operating the vehicle without their permission. The trial court correctly granted summary judgment because the Pooles established a prima facie case of lack of genuine issue of material fact on the issue of consent, thus shifting the burden to appellant to produce evidence demonstrating the existence of such an issue. Appellant’s evidence was insufficient to meet this burden, and summary judgment was therefore properly entered. DeMesme v. Stephenson, 498 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Martinez v. Hart, 270 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); Pearson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co., 187 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966); Hankerson v. Wilcox, 173 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); Fideli v. Colson, 165 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964); Keller v. Florida Power & Light Company, 156 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963).
Our affirmance of summary judgment in Case # 88-2246-CA renders moot the question of whether the trial court properly dismissed the complaint in Case # 89-1371-CA (trial court docket number). We have examined appellant’s other arguments and find them without merit.
AFFIRMED.
SMITH, NIMMONS and ALLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pearson v. ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 187 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966)
- Darius DeMESME v. Sam E. Stephenson, Jr., M.D., 498 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Hart v. France, 156 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Giannone v. State, 173 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Silvio Martinez v. Hart, 270 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- Pietro Fideli v. Colson, 165 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Orange Hayes v. City OF Miami, 165 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)