COLONIAL ENTERPRISES, INC., A CORPORATION, AND WILLIAM ALFRED SADLER, PETITIONERS,
v.
JANICE MARIE HILL, AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF MENDA MARIE HILL, DECEASED, RESPONDENT
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 court held that a prior judgment in a wrongful death suit brought by a widower does not estop the decedent's daughter, as administratrix, from litigating a survival action for the decedent's injuries from the same accident.
A widower sued for wrongful death of his wife after an automobile accident, and lost. The decedent's daughter, as administratrix, then sued for her mo…
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 Survival Action cases and more on FLexlaw
Certiorari was granted in this cause to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, (219 So.2d 51) on grounds of direct conflict with the opinion of this Court in Epps v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., 40 So.2d 131 (Fla. 1949).
Perdie Hill, the widower of Menda Marie Hill, sued under authority of Fla. Stat., § 768.02, F.S.A., for the wrongful death of his wife in an automobile accident. This issue was resolved in the defendants’ favor by a jury verdict and final judgment was entered for defendants.
The action sub judice was brought under authority of Fla.Stat., § 45.11 (now Fla. Stat., § 46.021, F.S.A.), by the daughter of Menda Marie Hill as administratrix of her mother’s estate for alleged injuries to Menda Marie Hill in the same accident involved in the previous action brought by Perdie Hill. The daughter was over twenty-one years of age at the time the judgment was entered in the prior suit brought by her father as widower of the deceased.
The District Court distinguished Epps v. Railway Express Agency, Inc., supra, in the following language:
“There the court held that the widow was estopped by the adverse judgment in the wrongful death suit from maintaining a suit in her capacity as administratrix against the same party based on the same accident. Essential to the Epps case, as we understand it, was an assumption that those persons beneficially interested in both suits were the same. It was on the basis of this assumption that the court held the plaintiff in the personal representative’s survival action was estopped by the prior judgment in the wrongful death suit.”
The District Court correctly held that the judgment in the widower’s suit did not estop the daughter from litigating *482the personal representative’s claim and we approve its opinion.
The writ of certiorari is, therefore,
Discharged.
ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW, and BOYD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rader v. Otis Elevator Co., 327 So. 2d 857 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Curtiss, 327 So. 2d 82 (Fla.App. 1st, 1976); Seaboard Coast Lina R.R. Co. v. Industrial Contr. Co., 260 So. 2d 860 (Fla.App. 4th, 1972) ; Hill v. Colonial Enterprises, Inc., 219 So. 2d 51 (Fla.App. 4th, 1969), cert. disch. 227 So. 2d 481 (Fla.1969). See also 50 C.J.S. Judgments § 819 (1947); 46 Am.Jur.2d Judgments § 546 (1969); Restatement of Judgments §§ 82, 84 (1942). Under Rule 1.180, R.C.P., Mrs. Rader was permitted but not required to assert her claim against Otis after Otis wa…
-
Dunmore v. Eagle Motor Lines and F-B Truck Lines, 560 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…ctor. Thus, neither res judicata nor collateral estoppel supports the entry of summary judgment because neither doctrine applies in the absence of privity, identity of persons, or liability in the same right. E.g. Colonial Enterprises, Inc. v. Hill, 227 So. 2d 481 (Fla.1969); Demoya v. Lorenzo, 468 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Newport Division, Tenneco Chemicals, Inc. v. Thompson, 330 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). See generally 32 Fla.Jur.2d Judgments and Decrees § 148 (1981). Nor can the summary judgmen…
-
Newport Division v. Allie Mae Thompson and Buford Pogue, 330 So. 2d 826 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…n judgments. Because the parties to the present actions are not in all respects the same as in the prior litigation, the conventional test for res judicata or estoppel, by judgment is not satisfied by this record. Colonial Enterprises, Inc. v. Hill, 227 So. 2d 481 (Fla.1969). Contrast Epps v. Railway Expr. Agency, Inc., 40 So. 2d 131 (Fla.1949); Rehe v. Airport U-Drive, Inc., 63 So. 2d 66 (Fla.1953). Shearn v. Orlando Funeral Home, Inc., 88 So. 2d 591 (Fla.1956), relied on by ap-pellees, involved the success…
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
- Epps v. Ry. Express Agency, 40 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 1949)
- Hill v. Colonial Enters., Inc., 219 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)