WILBUR GLENN HODGES, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
ALWIN HELM AND DONALD G. HELM, 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.
A passenger sued his ride's driver for gross negligence after an automobile accident. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendants, and the appellate court affirmed, holding that the facts presented—excessive speed on an unfamiliar road—did not establish gross negligence as required by Florida's guest-passenger statute.
The court held that the facts did not establish gross negligence. Excessive speed alone is insufficient under the statute; the defendant's conduct must be such that a reasonable and prudent person would know injury would probably and most likely result. The facts here fell short of that standard.
“simple negligence is that course of conduct which a reasonable and prudent man would know might possibly result in injury to persons or property whereas gross negligence is that course of conduct which a reasonable and prudent man would know would probably and most likely result in injury to persons or property”
Establishes the legal standard for distinguishing gross negligence from simple negligence under Florida law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff was a passenger in a car driven by defendant Donald G. Helm, owned by defendant Alwin Helm. The accident occurred at approximately 8:30 P.M.…
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 Gross Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal by the plaintiff from an adverse summary judgment. The action was for personal injuries received by the plaintiff in an automobile accident. Plaintiff was a passenger in a car driven by the defendant Donald G. Helm, allegedly with knowledge and consent of the owner, the defendant Alwin Helm. The complaint charged the defendant driver with gross negligence, the degree of negligence required to be established for recovery by an automobile guest passenger, under § 320.59 Fla.Stat., F.S.A. (in the absence of certain exceptions not applicable here).
The trial court upheld the sufficiency of the complaint on motion to dismiss, and the defendants answered admitting the allegations relating to the driving and the ownership of the car but denying the allegations of fault. When the cause came on for hearing on the motion of the defendants for summary judgment, there were before the court, in addition to the pleadings, certain answers of the parties to interrogatories, a deposi*319tion of the defendant driver, and two affidavits submitted in opposition to the motion, one by the plaintiff and one by a traffic expert.
In summary, the disclosed facts, viewed in a light most favorable to the party moved against, showed that the incident occurred at about 8:30 o’clock P.M. while the plaintiff and the defendant driver were returning home from work; that they had finished work between 7:30 and 8:00 o’clock; that they had stopped somewhere for a few beers; that the defendant driver, varying his usual route, was proceeding south on a street in Dade County with which he was unfamiliar; that the speed limit there was 30 miles per hour and that the defendant driver was proceeding at a speed of 50 miles an hour or slightly more; that the driver encountered a curve which he was unable to negotiate, ran off the road and continued for a distance of 126 feet to a point where he collided with a utility pole; that the driver did not see any sign warning of the curve, and the record fails to reveal whether or not there was such a warning sign.
In Carraway v. Revell, Fla.1959, 116 So.2d 16, 22, quoting with approval from Bridges v. Speer, Fla.1955, 79 So.2d 679, 682, the Supreme Court, with reference to proof of gross negligence in a guest-passenger case under the Florida Statute, said:
“We think the rule which would more nearly solve the problem than any other would be one which recognized that simple negligence is that course of conduct which a reasonable and prudent man would know might possibly result in injury to persons or property whereas gross negligence is that course of conduct which a reasonable and prudent man would know would probably and most likely result in injury to persons or property. To put it another way, if the course of conduct is such that the likelihood of injury to other persons or property is known by the actor to be imminent or ‘clear and present’ that negligence is gross, whereas other negligence would be simple negligence.”
Excessive speed alone is not sufficient to bring a case within the statute. O’Reilly v. Sattler, 141 Fla. 770, 193 So. 817; Orme v. Burr, 157 Fla. 378, 25 So.2d 870. The facts presented did not show the defendant driver to have been engaged in a course of conduct which a reasonable and prudent man would know would probably and most likely result in injury to his passenger. Carraway v. Revell, supra.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hodges v. Alwin Helm and Donald G. Helm, 222 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1969)…ion to Dismiss, but after consideration of all interrogatories, affidavits and a deposition of the defendant-driver, the trial court granted summary judgment to the respondent. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed per curiam but with opinion, 207 So. 2d 318 (DCA-3, Fla.1968). According to the District Court, the operative facts characterized this case as one of “excessive speed alone” which would not satisfy the gross negligence requirements of Florida’s Guest Statute, F.S. 320.-59, F.S.A. The facts o…
-
Schoenborn v. Slack, 213 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed upon authority of Hodges v. Helm, Fla.App.1968, 207 So. 2d 318; Carraway v. Revell, Fla.1959, 116 So. 2d 16; and Bridges v. Speer, Fla.1955, 79 So. 2d 679.…
-
Hodges v. Alwin Helm and Donald G. Helm, 223 So. 2d 761 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…PER CURIAM. Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on January 30, 1968 (207 So. 2d 318) affirmed the summary judgment of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed May 7, 1969 (222…
Authorities Cited
- Royal Carraway v. Revell, 116 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 1959)
- Orme v. Burr, 157 Fla. 378 (Fla. 1946)
- O'Reilly v. Sattler, 141 Fla. 770 (Fla. 1940)
- Bergen v. Wyett Shultz, 79 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 1955)
- Bridges v. Speer, 79 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 1955)