PASCO BELL AND ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
JOHNNIE MAE WHITE, APPELLEE
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 a jury verdict for a passenger injured in an Alabama automobile accident, holding that the evidence was insufficient to support a finding of willful, wanton, or gross conduct required under Alabama's guest passenger statute.
The evidence was insufficient to support a jury finding of willful, wanton, or gross conduct required to impose liability under Alabama's guest passenger statute.
[1] Under Alabama's guest passenger statute, a plaintiff must present evidence of willful, wanton, or gross conduct by the driver to recover; ordinary negligence is insuffici…
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 intelligenceAppellee was a passenger in an automobile owned and operated by appellant Bell and insured by appellant Allstate when an accident occurred in Alabama.…
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 Guest Passenger Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, defendants in the trial court, appeal from a final judgment rendered on a jury verdict favorable to appellee, plaintiff in the trial court, contending that their motion for directed verdict should have been granted.
The accident giving rise to this controversy occurred in the State of Alabama, requiring application of Alabama law. Ap-pellee was a passenger in an automobile owned and operated by appellant Bell and insured by appellant Allstate. The only issue on appellants’ appeal is whether there was any evidence adduced before the jury of such wilful, wanton or gross conduct as to meet the test of the Alabama guest passenger statute. Our examination of the record reveals that there was not and that appellants’ motion for directed verdict should have been granted.
Appellee has cross-appealed, contending that she was a paying passenger, thereby rendering the guest statute inapplicable and that the trial judge erred in granting appellants’ motion for directed verdict as to appellee’s guest passenger status. No useful purpose will be served by a lengthy recitation of the evidence. Suffice to say that our examination of the record, briefs and oral arguments reveals that there was no evidence upon which a jury could have found appellee to have been a paying passenger; therefore the learned trial judge was eminently correct in granting a directed verdict on that issue.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part with directions that judgment be entered for appellants, defendants in the trial court.
BOYER, C. J., and McCORD and MILLS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
MacKENZIE v. AVIS Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc., 369 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…rgo, however, the plaintiff relied only upon an alleged implied obligation to that effect; there was no specific provision, as in this case, which, the trier of fact could find, required the furnishing of UM protection. As the concurring opinion, at 339 So. 2d 720 points out: “The question here is whether Greyhound undertook in the rental contract between the parties to provide uninsured motorist insurance for the benefit of appellants. As the court here has stated, there was no specific agreement to provide…