ALTON HOOVER, APPELLANT,
v.
INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1964-06-10
No. 4338
ALLEN, Acting C. J., and WHITE, J., concur.
165 So. 2d 193 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1964) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Plaintiff Hoover appeals the dismissal of his third amended complaint seeking damages for injuries sustained when his airplane was struck by a pilot employed by a third party. Hoover argued that the newspaper defendant should be liable for the pilot's negligence under a joint enterprise theory, but the court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the allegations failed to establish the elements required for joint enterprise liability.


Holding

The court held that it is insufficient to establish joint enterprise liability merely by showing that a passenger indicated the route and flying position of the aircraft and that the employer bore the cost of airplane rental. The complaint failed to allege sufficient facts to satisfy the five essential elements of joint enterprise required under Florida law.


Key Quotes

“It is not sufficient to establish a joint enterprise between a pilot of an airplane and the employer of a passenger— such as would charge the employer with the negligence of the pilot in operating the plane — that the passenger indicated the route and the flying position of the plane and that the employer bore the cost of the rental of the airplane.”

States the legal standard that mere direction of route and cost-sharing are insufficient for joint enterprise liability

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

On September 18, 1959, an airplane piloted by M.C. Stone, employed by Reelstone Development Corporation, collided with an airplane operated by Hoover …

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.


Opinion of the Court
WILLIS, ROBERT E., Associate Judge.

WILLIS, ROBERT E., Associate Judge.

The appellant appeals from a final order dismissing his third amended complaint wherein he sought to recover for injuries allegedly sustained when his airplane was struck by the employee of a third party. He endeavors to impute the alleged negligence of the pilot to the defendant on the theory that the third party and the defendant were engaged in a joint business enterprise when the accident occurred. We affirm the action of the trial judge. There were other grounds in the motion to dismiss but we consider the question essential to the disposition of the cause here is the sufficiency of the complaint relative to the allegations that the defendant was engaged in a joint enterprise with the employer of the pilot of the airplane.

The pertinent paragraphs are as follows:

“1. On September 18, 1959, in a space approximately two hundred feet (200') southwest of the St. Lucie County Airport in St. Lucie County, Florida, one M. C. STONE negligently piloted and flew an airplane owned by *194Defendant FORT PIERCE FLYING SERVICE, INC., a Florida corporation, and leased by defendant INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC., a Florida Corporation, into and against an airplane which the plaintiff was flying.
“2. At said time and place M. C. STONE was employed by defendant, REELSTONE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Florida corporation; and was piloting said airplane in the scope of his employment on behalf of defendant, REELSTONE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION.
“3. At said time and place Defendant REELSTONE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION was engaged in a • joint enterprise with Defendant INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC., a Florida Corporation, by its authorized agent and employee acting in the scope of his employment, to acquire aerial photographs of certain real prop- . er'ty owned by Defendant REEL-STONE. DEVELOPMENT COR- . PORATION, which were to be published.by Defendant INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC., as part of a feature news story involving Mobile Home Courts in St. Lucie County, and for the employee of Defendant, IN- ' DIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC., and to take additional photographs of .a dairy. That the benefit to be derived by taking the aerial photographs at said time and place would be shared by Defendant REELSTONE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and by Defendant, INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC., in that the photo- . graphs would help sell copies of. Defendant INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC.’s newspapers when it . was published therein, and would help publicize the Defendant REEL-STONE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION’S Mobile Home Courts. The right to control, the aircraft and to ■ determine the method of acquiring the aerial photographs was shared by the Defendant INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC., and by Defendant REELSTONE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, in that the employee of Defendant REELSTONE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION piloted the aircraft in the scope of his employment, and that the employee of Defendant, INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC., directed him where to fly and what flying positions to assume while taking the photographs. The expenses and losses incurred in the aforesaid joint enterprise were also to be shared by the aforesaid Defendants REELSTONE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION and INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC.,, in that Defendant REELSTONE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION was to absorb the cost of the pilot’s time and Defendant INDIAN RIVER NEWSPAPER, INC., was to absorb the cost of the photographer’s time and the cost of the rental of the airplane.”

It is not sufficient to establish a joint enterprise between a pilot of an airplane and the employer of a passenger— such as would charge the employer with the negligence of the pilot in operating the plane — that the passenger indicated the route and the flying position of the plane and that the employer bore the cost of the rental of the airplane.

In Kislak v. Kreedian, 95 So.2d 510, at page 515, the Supreme Court of Florida said:

“In addition to the essentials of an ordinary contract, in contracts creating joint ventures there must be (1) a community of interest in the performance of the common purpose, (2) joint control or right of control, (3) a joint proprietary interest in the subject matter, (4) a right to share in the profits and (5) a duty to share in any losses which may be sustained. 48 C.J.S. *195Joint Adventures § 2, p. 809 and the authorities there referred to.”

Affirmed.

ALLEN, Acting C. J., and WHITE, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Fla. Tomato Packers, Inc. v. Wilson, 296 So. 2d 536 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
    …s of the other or of the servants of the joint undertaking committed within the course and scope of the undertaking, without regard to which of the joint venturers actually employed the servant. Hoover v. Indian River Newspaper, Inc., Fla.App. 1964, 165 So. 2d 193; Soden v. Starkman, Fla.App. 1969, 218 So. 2d 763. This court finds the record contains more than ample evidence to provide the legal predicate for the jury finding that a partnership and/or joint venture relationship existed between George F. Lyt-…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw