HARRY L. BASSETT, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE THOMAS EMIL MEYER, AND HENRI AND IRENE MEYER, THE PARENTS OF THE LATE THOMAS EMIL MEYER, APPELLANTS,
v.
MERLIN, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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.
The court held that Section 768.21(6)(a), Florida Statutes, is constitutional, and parents of an adult child cannot recover damages for mental pain and suffering under it.
Appellant, as personal representative, filed a wrongful death action for the parents of decedent Meyer, an adult with no dependents. The parents sough…
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 Damages For Mental Pain And Suffering cases and more on FLexlaw
OVERTON, Chief Justice.
This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court that initially and directly passed on the constitutionality of Section 768.21(6)(a), Florida Statutes. We have jurisdiction.1
Thomas Emil Meyer was killed in a two car collision on May 18, 1973. Appellant, the personal representative of his estate, filed on behalf of decedent and his parents a wrongful death action against the three appellees: the driver, the lessee, and the owner-lessor of the other car. Decedent Meyer, who at death was over 21 years of age, had no wife, no children, nor any other dependents. His parents are his only survivors under Florida’s wrongful death statute. Section 768.18(1), Florida Statutes. The trial court certified questions to the Third District Court of Appeal asking whether his parents could recover net accumulations under Section 768.21(6) (a), Florida Statutes. The Third District in Bassett v. Merlin, Inc., 304 So. 2d 543 (Fla. App.3rd, 1974), correctly answered the question in the negative.
Upon remand to the circuit court, the appellant asserted by motion the unconstitutionality of Section 768.21 on the grounds it denied parents of an adult child the right to damages for mental pain and suffering. The circuit court held the statute constitutional. We agree.
We previously considered and upheld the constitutionality of Section 768.21, Florida Statutes (1975), in a related factual situation in White v. Clayton, 323 So. 2d 573 (Fla.1975). See also Martin v. United Security Services, Inc., 314 So. 2d 765 (Fla.1975). Our prior decisions are controlling, and the order of the circuit court is affirmed.
It is so ordered.
ROBERTS, BOYD', ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., concur. ADKINS, J., dissents.
. Art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla.Const.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Faulkner v. Allstate Ins. Co. & Robert J. Leary, 333 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)…usly, if not directly, benefiting to a legally sufficient degree the noninjured spouse) and those able to join a claim for loss of consortium in a tort action by an injured spouse who has passed the threshold. Cf. Bassett v. Merlin, Inc., Fla. 1976, 335 So. 2d 273; White v. Clayton, Fla. 1975, 323 So. 2d 573; Martin v. United Security Services, Inc., Fla. 1975, 314 So. 2d 765. With respect to the “access to the courts” argument, it falls for somewhat the same reasons. In the case of a husband seeking loss of…
Authorities Cited
- Martin v. United Sec. Servs., Inc., 314 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 1975)
- White v. Clayton, 323 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 1975)
- Bassett v. Merlin, Inc., 304 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)