ARMOR ELEVATOR COMPANY, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION AND INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
ELEVATOR SALES & SERVICE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION AND CONSOLIDATED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, A NEW YORK CORPORATION, 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.
There is no right of contribution in favor of a third-party tortfeasor against a workmen's compensation employer when the employer is not under a common liability to the injured person due to statutory immunity.
A third-party tortfeasor sought contribution from an employer whose employee was injured. The employer's liability was limited by the Workmen's Compen…
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 Common Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The controlling question on this appeal is whether there is a right of contribution in favor of the third party tortfeasor against the workmen’s compensation employer where the third party is not under a common liability to the injured person and where the employer’s liability is limited by the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. See United Gas Pipeline Company v. Gulf Power Company, 334 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). We hold in accord with the cited case that there is no right of contribution.
Appellant third party tortfeasor seeks a holding that contribution should be allowed, relying upon Sunspan Engineering & Construction Company v. Spring-Lock Scaffolding Company, 310 So. 2d 4 (Fla.1975); and Trail Builders Supply Company v. Reagan, 235 So. 2d 482 (Fla.1970).
We think that this troublesome question has been laid to rest by the holding of the Supreme Court of Florida in Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company v. Smith (West Robinson Fruit Co.), 359 So. 2d 427 (Fla.1978), where the Supreme Court said:
“The key words of the contribution act are ‘common liability’ to the employee. Such ‘common liability’ cannot exist where the employer is immunized from liability by the Compensation Act for tort.” [Citing with approval the United Gas Pipeline Company case, cited above.]
See also Firestone Tire and Rubber Company v. Thompson Aircraft Tire Corporation, 353 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Farm Bureau Cas. Co. v. Lacy R. Batton, Sr., 444 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)…o the injured person it is no bar to contribution that liability of the parties rests on different grounds. Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Village of Hewitt, 274 Minn. 246, 143 N.W. 2d 230 (1966); Armor Elevator Co. v. Elevator Sales & Service, Inc., 360 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). But where one tort-feasor is immune from suit by the victim, the others cannot compel contribution because the alleged tort-feasors are not then jointly and severally liable. Armor Elevator Co., 360 So. 2d at 1129. In Seaboard C…
-
Wallace v. Strassel, 479 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)…o the injured person it is no bar to contribution that liability of the parties rests on different grounds. Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Village of Hewitt, 274 Minn. 246, 143 N.W. 2d 230 (1966); Armor Elevator Co. v. Elevator Sales & Service, Inc., 360 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). But where one tort-feasor is immune from suit by the victim, the others cannot compel contribution because the alleged tort-feasors are not then jointly and severally liable. Armor Elevator Co., 360 So. 2d at 1129. While Batton…
-
Commercial Union Ins. Co. & Otis Elevator Co. v. Bayfront Med. Ctr., 363 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)…party defendant on Count II which sought contribution pursuant to Section 768.31, Florida Statutes (1975). See Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company v. Smith, 359 So. 2d 427 (Fla.1978); Armor Elevator Company, Inc. v. Elevator Sales & Service, Inc., 360 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). We reverse the summary judgment for appellee/third party defendant on Count I which sought indemnity on the theory that appellee Bayfront was an active tort feasor, whereas appellant Otis’ negligence, if any, was passive. It is…
Authorities Cited
- Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Smith, 359 So. 2d 427 (Fla. 1978)
- Sunspan Eng'g & Constr. Co. v. Spring-Lock Scaffolding Co. & Spring-Lock Scaffolding of Fla., Inc., 310 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1975)
- The Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Thompson Aircraft Tire Corp., 353 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Trail Builders Supply Co. v. Reagan, 235 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 1970)
- United GAS Pipeline Co. v. Gulf Power Co., 334 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)