THE HERTZ CORPORATION, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
DOROTHY G. RICHARDS AND RONALD C. RICHARDS AND RONALD J. RICHARDS, A MINOR, BY HIS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND, RONALD C. RICHARDS, APPELLEES; CAROLINE MARY TAYLOR, APPELLANT, V. THE HERTZ CORPORATION, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, DOROTHY G. RICHARDS AND RONALD J. RICHARDS, A MINOR, BY HIS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND, RONALD C. RICHARDS, 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 owner of a rental vehicle is entitled to indemnification from an unauthorized, negligent driver for damages awarded to a third party, even if the renter paid for liability insurance, when the driver is excluded from the policy's coverage.
The Hertz Corporation rented a car to Gerald McGee, who allowed Caroline Taylor to drive it. Taylor negligently caused an accident, admitting liabilit…
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 Tortfeasor Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
Dorothy G. Richards and Ronald C. Richards and their son, Ronald J. Richards, a minor, filed suit on account of personal injuries resulting from an automobile accident against The Hertz Corporation, the owner of an automobile which had allegedly collided with their motor vehicle. The Hertz Corporation who had rented the automobile to Gerald McGee and who is not a party to this suit, filed a Third Party Complaint against Caroline Taylor, the driver of the car, alleging that she was primarily responsible for any damage suffered by the plaintiffs and she being the actual tort-feasor should be held liable for all damages adjudged against The Hertz Corporation. Miss Taylor’s motion to dismiss Third Party Complaint was granted but The Hertz Corporation filed an amended complaint to which another motion to dismiss was filed but which was denied. Thereafter, both Hertz and Taylor moved for Summary Judgment on the Third Party pleadings. The trial court granted summary judgment for Hertz and awarded to it judgment against Taylor for all damages *785which thereafter would be awarded to the Richards against The Hertz Corporation.
The cause then proceeded to trial on damages only as liability had been admitted. A verdict was returned for the plaintiffs, Dorothy G. Richards, Ronald J. Richards and Ronald C. Richards in the respective amount of $11,500, $100 and $3,400. Motion for new trial was denied and two appeals were taken which were consolidated; one from the summary judgment on Third Party pleadings and the other from the final judgment.
There are two points involved in this appeal. The first point is whether the lessee of an automobile pursuant to a rental agreement who paid the owner for liability insurance and the lessee in turn permits another person to operate the vehicle, is the owner of the vehicle entitled to indemnification from the person operating the vehicle for damages to a Third Party because of the operator’s negligence ?
Gerald McGee rented a Hertz-owned vehicle and thereafter allowed Caroline Taylor to use the same but she operated it so negligently as to cause an accident for which she admitted liability. The rental agreement reveals that McGee paid Hertz for liability insurance and the agreement, among other things, provided as follows; * * * 2. * * * Under no circumstances shall vehicle be used, operated or driven * * * by any-person except (1) customer; or (2) if a qualified licensed driver and provided customer’s permission be first obtained, (a) a member of customer’s immediate family, (b) customer’s employer, or (c) an employee of customer’s in the course of such employee’s regular and usual employment by customer * * *. 7. * * * said policy does not apply to * * * while being operated * * * (1) by any other person other than (a) customer, (b) customer’s employer, (c) a person regularly employed by customer in the usual course of his business, (d) any partner, executive officer or customer, or (e) a member of the immediate family of customer or any partners, or executive officer or customer
In Florida, as a normal rule, the owner of an automobile who is liable only vicariously to a Third Party because of an automobile accident is entitled to recover from the driver of the vehicle who is the actual tort-feasor. An exception to this rule has been recognized where the rental agreement provided that the renter participate in the benefits of a public liability and property damage insurance policy subject to its terms and conditions. Morse Auto Rentals v. Lewis (Fla.App.1964) 161 So.2d 235; Bordettsky v. Hertz Corporation (Fla.App.1965) 171 So.2d 174.
In the above two cases, the tort-feasor was renter or customer and was protected by the policy for which he had paid. In the instant case, the tort-feasor, Miss Taylor, was not the customer and she was excluded from participation in the policy by the terms of the agreement. She testified that she was not related to McGee nor assisted him in his business and at the time of the accident was not doing anything in connection with his business and was not in McGee’s employ. At the time of the accident, she was employed by United Airlines and he in the advertising business. On the date of the accident, McGee was residing at Miami Springs Villa and Miss Taylor visited him and she wanted to go to her apartment in South Bay Shore Drive when McGee told her to take the car. On the way home, she had the accident. According to the above facts, the agreement was violated and Miss Taylor was not protected or insured by the rental agreement so Hertz is entitled to indemnification.
The appellant’s second point challenges the verdict claiming that it was excessive. There was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s determination of the damage amount. The trial judge so found when he refused to disturb the verdicts and denied the defendants’ motion for a new *786trial. It would not appear to be in the interest of justice to have another jury assess the damages in this case. Cloud v. Fallis, Fla., 110 So.2d 669; Florida East Coast Railway Company v. Stewart, Fla. App., 140 So.2d 880; Red Top Cab and Baggage Company v. MacLaughlin (Fla. App.1965) 171 So.2d 22.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Allstate Ins. Co. OF Canada v. Value Rent-A-Car OF Fla., Inc., 463 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)…by another person’s operation of his vehicle is entitled to indemnification from the negligent driver. Rebhan Leasing Corporation v. Trias, 419 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied, 427 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 1983); Hertz Corporation v. Richards, 224 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969); Allstate Insurance Company v. Fowler, 455 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). In the case at bar the lessor was not actively negligent in causing the accident; its liability is solely on account of its being the owner of the vehicle.…
-
Rebhan Leasing Corp. v. Trias, 419 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…demnification.3 We reverse. The law is well-settled that one who is only vicariously liable is entitled to indemnification from the active tortfeasors. Houdaille Industries, Inc. v. Edwards, 374 So. 2d 490 (Fla.1979); Hertz Corporation v. Richards, 224 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). The fact that the active tortfeasors settled with the plaintiff does not release them from the claim for indemnification by the party held vicariously liable. Elier and Company v. Morgan, 393 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA), pet. for r…
-
Roth v. Cannel, 242 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…ified. Morse Auto Rentals, Inc. v. Lewis, Fla.App.1964, 161 So. 2d 235. Nevertheless, the line of cases represented by Morse Auto Rentals, Inc. v. Lewis, Fla.App.1964, 161 So. 2d 235, is distinguished in Hertz Corporation v. Richards, Fla.App.1969, 224 So. 2d 784. There, the renter of a leased automobile permitted it to be driven by a person excluded from coverage in the liability policy for which the renter paid the owner, and the owner was held entitled to indemnification from a negligent, permissive drive…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1959)
- Ashville v. Super Concrete, Inc., 161 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Virgie Stewart, 140 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)
- Eli Bordettsky v. The HERTZ Corp., 171 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)
- RED TOP CAB & Baggage Co. v. MacLAUGHLIN, 171 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)