ALMOND H. THOMAS AND IRENE THOMAS, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
ATLANTIC ASSOCIATES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION AND HENRY ROBERTS, 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 Thomases appealed a summary judgment dismissing their negligence action against Atlantic Associates and Henry Roberts for injuries resulting from a collision caused by Roberts's thirteen-year-old daughter. The court affirmed the summary judgment, finding no negligence or implied consent for the daughter's use of the automobile.
Summary judgment was properly entered because the evidence clearly showed the automobile was used by the daughter without the express or implied consent of Roberts or Atlantic Associates, and there was no negligence in leaving the keys on the dresser.
“From these, there was a clear showing that the automobile was being used by the daughter without the express or implied consent of Roberts or Atlantic, and that there was no negligence shown in the leaving of the keys to the automobile on the dresser.”
Establishes the factual basis for upholding summary judgment—no consent and no negligence in key placement
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAtlantic Associates owned an automobile and allowed Henry Roberts unrestricted use of it. Roberts's thirteen-year-old daughter came to live with him a…
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 Negligent Entrustment cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from a summary final judgment entered in favor of the defendants in an action for damages resulting from the alleged negligent operation of an automobile by the thirteen year old daughter of one of the defendants.
The facts are not in dispute. Atlantic Associates, Inc. owned an automobile and allowed Henry Roberts the unrestricted use of it for an indefinite period. Just prior to the time this automobile was *921placed in the hands of Roberts, his thirteen year old daughter by a previous marriage came from Orlando to live with her father and stepmother. During the four to six week period Roberts was using the automobile, the keys were left on the dresser when the car was not being used. Roberts went to Chicago and left the automobile with his wife. Several days later while the daughter was home alone, she took the keys from their usual place on the dresser and drove the automobile to a nearby grocery store. While en route she collided with the automobile of the plaintiffs causing injury to them. At no time prior to the accident was Roberts aware that his daughter ever drove or could drive an automobile.
The plaintiffs sued Atlantic Associates, Inc. and Henry Roberts, alleging that Maurine Roberts, the minor daughter of Henry Roberts, was carelessly permitted to operate an automobile owned by Atlantic Associates, Inc. and entrusted to Henry Roberts! The complaint further alleges that the minor negligently operated or maintained the motor vehicle so that it collided with plaintiff’s motor vehicle. These allegations were denied.
After depositions were takén and affidavits submitted, the defendants moved for and obtained a summary judgment. From these, there was a clear showing that the automobile was being used by the daughter without the express or implied consent of Roberts or Atlantic, and that there was no negligence shown in the leaving of the keys to the automobile on the dresser.
Appellants contend that the trial judge erred in entering summary final judgment. We can not agree.
We have carefully considered the record, briefs and argument in light of the rules enunciated in Holl v. Talcott, Fla.1966, 191 So.2d 40; Susco Car Rental System of Florida v. Leonard, Fla.1959, 112 So.2d 832; and Pearson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., Fla.App.1966, 187 So.2d 343, which we find to be controlling authorities for the points on appeal, and have concluded that the trial judge correctly entered the summary final judgment appealed. Therefore, the said judgment should be and it is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Almond H. Thomas and Irene Thomas v. Atl. Assocs., Inc., 226 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1969)…ROBERTS, Justice. This cause is before the court on certi-orari granted on direct conflict grounds to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, in Thomas v. Atlantic Associates, Inc., Fla.App.1968, 212 So. 2d 920. The facts, which are not disputed, are stated succinctly in the decision here reviewed, as follows:— “Atlantic Associates, Inc. owned an automobile and allowed Henry Roberts the unrestricted use of it for an indefinite period. Just prior to the t…
-
Almond H. Thomas and Irene Thomas v. Atl. Assocs., Inc., 226 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…PER CURIAM. Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on July 23, 1968 (212 So. 2d 920) affirming the summary final 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 July 30,…
-
Almond H. Thomas and Irene Thomas v. Atl. Assocs., Inc., 241 So. 2d 727 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)
Authorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Miller v. Miller, 112 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 1959)
- Susco CAR Rental Sys. OF Fla. v. Leonard, 112 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 1959)
- Pearson v. ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., 187 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966)