BOBBY JOE MURPHY, MAY RINE MURPHY, AND KENNETH WAYNE MURPHY, APPELLANTS,
v.
JAMES G. THORNTON, BRENDA G. THORNTON, AND JAMES DUSTIN THORNTON, 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.
In this negligence case, the court addressed which state's law applies to an injury occurring in a Florida condominium when all parties reside in Alabama. The court held that Florida law applies because the situs of the injury and conduct was in Florida and constituted more than mere fortuity, reversing the trial court's grant of summary judgment based on Alabama law.
Florida law applies because the injury and the conduct causing it occurred in Florida, and the situs was more than mere fortuity since it was based on the Appellees' ownership of the Florida premises. The trial court's order applying Alabama law and granting summary judgment is reversed.
[1] In personal injury actions, the law of the state where the injury occurred generally applies unless another state has a more significant interest in the matter.
[2] The situs of an injury is typically the decisive consideration in determining the applicable choice of law in a personal injury action.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“In actions for personal injury, the law of the state where the injury occurred applies unless, with respect to the matter at issue in the litigation, another state has a more significant interest.”
Establishes the general rule for choice of law in personal injury cases.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKenneth Murphy was injured during horseplay at a Florida condominium owned by the Thorntons. All parties to the action reside in Alabama. The Appellee…
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 Negligence Action cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause is before us on the trial court’s order determining that Alabama law applies to the negligence action, and granting summary final judgment in favor of Appellees. We have jurisdiction. Fla. R.App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A).
Appellant Kenneth Murphy (Kenneth) was injured while he, Appellee James Dustin Thornton (Dustin), and another friend were engaged in horseplay in Appellees’ Florida condominium. All parties to the action reside in Alabama. Appellants filed a personal injury lawsuit in Florida based upon the negligence of the Thorntons, as owners of the premises, and Dustin, the son of the owners. Appellees sought a declaration that Alabama law, rather than Florida law, governs liability, and moved for summary judgment, alleging that under Alabama law, Kenneth’s contributory negligence barred his recovery.
In actions for personal injury, the law of the state where the injury occurred applies unless, with respect to the matter at issue in the litigation, another state has a more significant interest. Crowell v. Clay Hyder Trucking Lines, Inc., 700 So. 2d 120, 123 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)(citing Restatement (Second) Conflict of Laws § 145, 175 (1971), and State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Olsen, 406 So. 2d 1109 (Fla.1981)), rev. denied, 705 So. 2d 569 (Fla.1998).
The situs of injury is, under most circumstances, “the decisive consideration in determining the applicable choice of law.” Bishop v. Florida Specialty Paint Co., 389 So. 2d 999, 1001 (Fla.1980). Here, the injury and the conduct causing the injury occurred in Florida. We acknowledge and do not disagree with cases rejecting the law of the situs, where situs was a mere fortuity or happenstance. See, e.g., Bishop, supra (acknowledging situs of plane crash was sole contact with the state where injury occurred); Stallworth v. Hospitality Rentals, Inc., 515 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)(holding that place of automobile accident and conduct causing injury had little significance to issue of vicarious liability); Krasnosky v. Meredith, 447 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)(applying Florida law where situs of automobile accident was only contact with Georgia), rev. denied, 446 So. 2d 99 (Fla.1984); Proprietors Ins. Co. v. Valsecchi, 435 So. 2d 290, 295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)(acknowledging situs of plane crash was only contact with forum state), rev. denied, 449 So. 2d 265 (Fla.1984). In the instant case, the situs of the injury was more than mere fortuity, and is based on Appellees’ ownership of the premises involved. Accordingly, we quash the trial court’s order and remand the cause for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
BARFIELD, C.J., BOOTH and WOLF, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Connell v. Riggins, 944 So. 2d 1174 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…— “has a more significant relationship under the principles stated in § 6 to the occurrence and the parties, in which event the local law of the other state will be applied.” Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws § 146 (1971); Murphy v. Thornton, 746 So. 2d 575, 575-76 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). Therefore, in this negligence litigation, as Georgia was the site of the accident, its local law determines the parties’ rights and liabilities respecting the issues of negligence and damages unless Florida has a more si…
-
Hoffman v. Helene Ouellette, 798 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…ittle weight should be given to this factor, because the location of the accident is merely fortuitous. Given the residence of the parties, their ties to Florida, and the circumstances of this accident, that argument is rejected. Murphy v. Thornton, 746 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). 2) The place where the conduct causing the injury occurred. This is also Florida. 3) The domicile, residence, and nationality of the parties. The resolution of this factor is inconclusive. While both parties were Quebec citize…
Authorities Cited
- Althea G. Bishop and William J. Bishop, Sr. v. Fla. Specialty Paint Co., 389 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 1980)
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Olsen, 406 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 1981)
- Marineflet, Inc. v. Warhaftig, 435 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Stallworth v. Hospitality Rentals, Inc., 515 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Krasnosky v. Meredith, 447 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Crowell v. Clay Hyder Trucking Lines, Inc., 700 So. 2d 120 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)