MORTGAGE CORPORATION OF AMERICA, APPELLANT,
v.
RONALD VORNDRAN ET AL., 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.
Florida appellate court reversed dismissal of third-party indemnification complaint against construction contractor, holding that Florida's workers' compensation exclusive remedy statute does not bar indemnification claims between joint tortfeasors.
A third-party complaint seeking indemnification from a joint tortfeasor is not barred by Florida's workers' compensation exclusive remedy statute merely because the third-party defendant employed the injured worker.
[1] Florida Statute 440.11's exclusive remedy provision does not bar indemnification claims between joint tortfeasors in construction injury cases.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMortgage Corporation of America owned a building under construction by Du-B Corporation. Ronald Vorndran, an employee of Du-B, was injured while worki…
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 Workers' Compensation Exclusive Remedy cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Mortgage Corporation of America, appeals from a final order dismissing with prejudice its amended third-party complaint against appellee, Du-B Corporation, in an action brought by Ronald Vorndran for personal injuries which he sustained while working as an employee of appellee Du-B on the construction of a building owned by the appellant.
Appellants filed an answer containing a general denial, affirmative defenses, and also a third party complaint alleging, inter alia, that appellant was only vicariously liable for the injuries which were the result of the negligence of the appellee, DuB, and that appellant would be entitled to indemnification from appellee, Du-B.
Du-B moved to dismiss appellant’s amended third party complaint on the ground that it failed to state a cause of action in that liability of the third party defendant is limited to the “exclusive remedy” concept as provided by Florida Statute 440.11. The motion was granted and the order of dismissal was entered.
It is appellant’s contention on appeal that the trial court erred in dismissing its third party complaint. We find merit in this contention and reverse. See Sunspan Engineering and Construction Company v. Spring-Lock Scaffolding Co., Fla. 1975, 310 So. 2d 4; Florida East Coast Railway Company v. Rouse, Fla.1967, 194 So. 2d 260.
The order appealed is reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Scott & Jobalia Constr. Co., Inc. v. Halifax Paving, Inc., 538 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)…iability is characterized as “vicarious” or “derivative,” as required by Houdaille Industries, Inc. v. Edwards, 374 So. 2d 490 (Fla.1979) (lack of active negligence or fault necessary in an indemnity suit). See Mortgage Corp. of America v. Vorndran, 334 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Burton v. Diamond Sand & Stone Co., 327 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976); Atlantic Coast; Serrano; Wetherington, Tort Indemnity in Florida, 8 F.S.U. 383, 397, 410 (1980). Secondly, we think Halifax sufficiently established that it s…
-
Amisub OF Fla., Inc. v. Derrell O. Billington, D.O., 560 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…to permit the recovery of a judgment, fees and costs which one, such as an employer like the hospital here, is required to expend when it is held liable only because of the vicarious wrongdoing of another. See Mortgage Corp. of America v. Vorndran, 334 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Solar America Corp. v. Independent Solar Plan Co., 505 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). This rule, [*1272] however, is not applicable in the present situation in which there has been neither a satisfaction of a judgment actually re…
-
Miami Int'l Merchandise Mart, Inc. v. Gene Somers & Assocs., Inc., 506 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…ployees. City of Clearwater v. L.M. Duncan & Sons, Inc., 466 So. 2d 1116 (Fla.2d DCA 1985), aff'd, 478 So. 2d 816 (Fla.1985); see Sunspan Eng’g & Constr. Co. v. Spring-Lock Scaffolding, 310 So. 2d 4 (Fla.1975); Mortgage Corp. of America v. Vorndran, 334 So. 2d 88 (Fla.3d DCA 1976). Since the [*55] parties’ lease agreement provided that GS & A would indemnify MIMM for liability it might incur to GS & A’s employees, the third party complaint stated a cause of action for indemnity and should not have been dismi…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Rouse, 194 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1966)
- Sunspan Eng'g & Constr. Co. v. Spring-Lock Scaffolding Co. & Spring-Lock Scaffolding of Fla., Inc., 310 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1975)