MICHAEL LORING, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
DELISE K. WINTERS, 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.
In this auto accident personal injury case, the appellant Loring challenged the trial court's refusal to instruct the jury on damages for disability, disfigurement, and loss of capacity for enjoyment of life. The Florida appellate court affirmed the judgment, holding that Florida's no-fault motor vehicle statute limits noneconomic damages to pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience, excluding the damages Loring sought.
The court held that Section 627.737 plainly limits noneconomic damages in motor vehicle tort actions to pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience. Damages for disability, disfigurement, and loss of capacity for enjoyment of life are not recoverable under Florida law despite their potential availability at common law prior to the no-fault legislation. Therefore, the trial court did not err in refusing the requested jury instruction.
[1] Florida's no-fault insurance statute exempts owners, registrants, operators, or occupants of motor vehicles from tort liability for noneconomic damages, except for pain,…
[2] Damages for disability, disfigurement, and loss of capacity of enjoyment of life are not recoverable under Florida's no-fault insurance statute.
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 intelligence“Section 627.737 plainly intends to exempt owners, registrants, operators, or occupants from tort liability for all noneconomic damages except those damages "for pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience for such injury under the provisions of subsection (2)."”
The court's primary holding that the statute restricts recoverable noneconomic damages to a specific enumerated list, excluding disability, disfigurement, and loss of enjoyment of life.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMichael Loring, Jr., was injured in an automobile accident caused by Delise K. Winters. A jury awarded Loring $2,596.50 plus taxable costs. Winters wa…
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 Tort Liability Exemption cases and more on FLexlaw
PARKER, Acting Chief Judge.
In this personal injury lawsuit, Michael Loring, Jr., appeals the final judgment in which Delise K. Winters was awarded $8,612.99 after setoff.1 Loring raises three issues on appeal, none of which merit reversal. We affirm the final judgment but write to address Loring’s challenge to a jury instruction given by the trial court.
Loring argued to the trial court that under section 627.737, Florida Statutes (1993),2 he was entitled to a jury instruction that he could recover damages for disability, disfigurement, and loss of capacity of enjoyment of life. Loring argued that these damages were available at common law prior to the enactment of the no-fault legislation and that, under Florida common law, he is still entitled to have the jury instructed on these damages. We disagree and can find no cases in Florida that support Loring’s position. Section 627.737 plainly intends to exempt owners, registrants, operators, or occupants from tort liability for all noneconomic damages except those damages “for pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience for such injury under the provisions of subsection (2).” Because Loring was not entitled to recover damages for disability, disfigurement, and loss of capacity of enjoyment of life, the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on those damages.
Affirmed.
ALTENBERND and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur. . After Loring sued Winters for injuries resulting from an auto accident, a jury awarded Loring $2,596.50 plus taxable costs of $ 1,721.75. Winters, by virtue of proposals for settlement and offers of judgment, was entitled to attorneys’ fees of $12,029.80 plus taxable costs of $901.44.
. Section 627.737, Florida Statutes (1993), provides in pertinent part:
(1) Every owner, registrant, operator, or occupant of a motor vehicle with respect to which security has been provided as required by ss. 627.730-627.7405, and every person or organization legally responsible for his acts or omissions, is hereby exempted from tort liability for damages because of bodily injury, sickness, or disease arising out of the ownership, operation, maintenance, or use of such motor vehicle in this state to the extent that the benefits described in s. 627.736(1) are payable for such injury, or would be payable but for any exclusion authorized by ss. 627.730-627.7405, under any insurance policy or other method of security complying with the requirements of s. 627.733, or by an owner personally liable under s. 627.733 for the payment of such benefits, unless a person is entitled to maintain an action for pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience for such injury under the provisions of subsection (2).
(2) In any action of tort brought against the owner, registrant, operator, or occupant of a motor vehicle with respect to which security has been provided as required by ss. 627.730-627.7405, or against any person or organization legally responsible for his acts or omissions, a plaintiff may recover damages in tort for pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience because of bodily injury, sickness, or disease arising out of the ownership, maintenance, operation, or use of such motor vehicle only in the event that the injury or disease consists in whole or in part of:
(b) Permanent injury within a reasonable degree of medical probability, other than scarring or disfigurement.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smiley v. Nelson, 805 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…Accordingly, we hold that noneconomic damages, including those for disability, physical impairment, and loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, are not available under the no-fault law absent a finding of permanent injury. See Loring v. Winters, 802 So. 2d 335, (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (holding that section 627.737 plainly intends to exempt owners, registrants, operators, or occupants from tort liability for all noneco-nomic damages except those damages “for pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience fo…
-
Sweitzer v. Thomas, 834 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…specifically referenced in section 627.737(2). At the time of the trial in May, 2001, the trial court did not have the guidance of subsequently published decisions of other district courts addressing this issue, including, e.g., Loving v. Winters, 802 So. 2d 335 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), Gill v. McGuire, 806 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), and Giles v. Luckie, 816 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Those decisions hold that an injured plaintiff must satisfy the threshold requirements of • section 627.737(2) in order…
-
Sweitzer v. Thomas, 870 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 2004)…PER CURIAM. We initially accepted jurisdiction to review Sweitzer v. Thomas, 834 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), a decision alleged to be in express and direct conflict with Loring v. Winters, 802 So. 2d 335 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Upon further consideration, we have now determined that we should exercise our discretion and discharge jurisdiction. Accordingly, this review proceeding is hereby dismissed. It is so ordered.…