SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, AND NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION, A CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
ALLEN MACK GORDON AND DELCHER BROTHERS STORAGE, INC., 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.
Seaboard Coast Line Railroad appealed the dismissal of its crossclaim and third-party complaint against a truck driver and his employer for contribution following a collision. The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the railroad was an active tortfeasor and that the settlement between the original plaintiffs and the defendant truck driver barred any contribution claim under Florida's Uniform Contribution Among Tort Feasors Act.
The court held that the trial court was correct in dismissing the crossclaim and third-party complaint because the railroad was at least an active tortfeasor, not merely a passive one. The court further affirmed based on Florida's Uniform Contribution Among Tort Feasors Act, which provides that settlement between original plaintiffs and one tortfeasor releases that tortfeasor from all liability for contribution to other tortfeasors.
[1] A railroad company that is an active tortfeasor cannot seek indemnification from another party based on passive negligence.
[2] A settlement with one tortfeasor, given in good faith, discharges that tortfeasor from liability for contribution to any other tortfeasor.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“it is apparent on the face thereof that the Railroad was at least an active tort feasor”
The court's primary basis for affirming dismissal of the contribution claim, distinguishing active from passive tortfeasors
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWhile transporting household goods, a truck owned by Delcher Brothers Storage, Inc. and driven by Allen Mack Gordon became stuck on railroad tracks ju…
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 Release Of Tortfeasor cases and more on FLexlaw
BARKDULL, THOMAS E., Associate Judge.
From the record on appeal, it appears that while transporting household goods of the Nordeens [parties not involved in this appeal] a truck, owned by Delcher Brothers Storage, Inc. and being driven by Allen Mack Gordon, became stuck across the tracks of the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company. This crossing was shortly beyond a curve in the Seaboard tracks. When the train rounded the curve, upon observing the stalled truck, it was unable to stop because of its speed before colliding with the truck. Subsequently, an action was commenced by the Nordeens against Seaboard and Gordon to recover for the damage to their personal property. Seaboard filed a crossclaim against Gordon and a third-party complaint against Gordon’s employer, seeking indemnification based upon a theory of passive negligence on the part of the Railroad and active negligence on the part of Gordon, which would make his employer vicariously liable. The trial judge dismissed with prejudice the crossclaim and the third-party complaint. This appeal ensured.
Subsequent to the order of the trial court, here under review, the Nordeens settled with Gordon and Delcher. The appel-lees contend that this in and of itself, because of the provisions of the new Uniform Contribution Among Tort Feasors Act, enacted by the 1975 Legislature, and particularly § 768.31(5) (b),1 releases them from any action seeking contribution.2
We hold, first, that the trial judge was correct in dismissing the cross-claim and third-party complaint because it is apparent on the face thereof that the Railroad was at least an active tort feasor. Florida East Coast Railway Company v. Soper, Fla.App.1962, 146 So. 2d 605. We further affirm the action because of the provisions of § 768.31(5) (b), of the Uniform Contribution Among Tort Feasors Act, it being conceded that the original plaintiffs had settled their original claim against Gordon.
Therefore, the order here under review be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
RAWLS, Acting C. J., and MELVIN, WOODROW M., Associate Judge, concur. . This opinion is not to be construed as passing on the validity of this statute, a point not made on this appeal.
. “(5) RELEASE OR COVENANT NOT TO SUE. — When a release or a covenant not to sue or not to enforce judgment is given in good faith to one of two or more persons liable in tort for the same injury of the same wrongful death:
“(b) It discharges the tortfeasor to whom it is given from all liability for contribution to any other tortfeasor.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Frank M. Stuart, M.D., P.A. v. The HERTZ Corp., 351 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 1977)…where each tortfeasor is chargeable with active or affirmative negligence contributing to the injury for which recovery was had, neither is entitled to indemnity from the other. 41 Am.Jur.2d Indemnity § 21. See Seaboard Coast Line R. Co. v. Gordon, 328 So. 2d 206 (Fla.1st DCA 1976); Armor Elev. Co., Inc. v. Elev. Sales & Serv., Inc., 309 So. 2d 44 (Fla.3d DCA 1975); Dura Corp. v. Wallace, 297 So. 2d 619 (Fla.3d DCA 1974); General Motors Corp. v. County of Dade, 272 So. 2d 192 (Fla.3d DCA 1973); University Pl…
-
Schreier v. Parker, 415 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…aim was barred. Metropolitan Dade County Transit Authority v. Simmons, 375 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied 386 So. 2d 639 (Fla.1980); Martinez v. Gonzalez, 368 So. 2d 92 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company v. Gordon, 328 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). We turn now to one other point which merits discussion. During the close of the case, counsel for defendant Schreier, and counsel for plaintiff Parker, made arguments which, in the court’s view, are wholly inappropriate.1 The p…
-
Rebhan Leasing Corp. v. Trias, 419 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…ias, and General Tire and Rubber Company, and its insurer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company. . The appellants admit that their claim for contribution was properly dismissed. § 768.-31(5)(b), Fla.Stat. (1977); Seaboard Coast Line Railroad v. Gordon, 328 So. 2d 206 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Soper, 146 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)
- Frane v. Glasser, 146 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)