Underwriters at Lloyds v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 57815

Decision Date03 April 1980
Docket NumberNo. 57815,57815
Citation382 So.2d 702
PartiesUNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS and Frank A. Stuart, M.D., Petitioners, v. CITY OF LAUDERDALE LAKES, a Municipal Corporation, and Jay Clide Miller, Respondents.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Ricardo J. Cata, of Fleming, O'Bryan & Fleming, Fort Lauderdale, for petitioners.

Edna L. Caruso, West Palm Beach, for respondents.

McDONALD, Justice.

The Fourth District Court of Appeal has certified the following question as being of great public interest:

DOES THE DECISION IN STUART V. HERTZ BAR A SEPARATE LAWSUIT BY THE INITIAL TORTFEASOR AGAINST A SUCCESSOR TORTFEASOR WHO AGGRAVATES THE ORIGINAL INJURIES?

373 So.2d at 946. Pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution, we have accepted jurisdiction.

Paula Bissonette sustained back injuries in an automobile accident caused by an employee of the City of Lauderdale Lakes. Allegedly, her injuries were exacerbated by her doctor, who, it is claimed, negligently performed an unsuccessful laminectomy and fusion of Ms. Bissonette's spine.

After settling with the victim for all injuries flowing from the accident and her treatment thereof, the City of Lauderdale Lakes instituted an action for indemnification against the doctor. Because of our decision in Stuart v. Hertz, 351 So.2d 703 (Fla.1977), the city attempted to amend its complaint to sue the doctor under a theory of subrogation. The trial court denied the city's motion to amend and granted summary judgment for the defendant insurance company. An appeal to the Fourth District Court of Appeal ensued. The district court reversed, distinguishing the instant controversy from Hertz.

In Hertz, this Court held that third-party indemnity actions against subsequent tortfeasors are inappropriate. That decision was premised on the traditional doctrine that an initial tortfeasor may not benefit from his own wrong by bringing a third-party claim against a doctor whose alleged malpractice aggravated the victim's injuries. Our concern was that such third-party claims would hamper the litigation process for the aggrieved victim by attaching "a complex malpractice (case) in order to proceed with a simple personal injury suit." 351 So.2d at 706. Allowing such expansion would foreclose the victim's ability to control the nature and course of the suit.

The initial tortfeasor is subject to the total financial burden of the victim's injuries, including those directly attributable to a doctor's malpractice. But is it fair and equitable for such a tortfeasor to have to pay a sum greater than should have flowed from an accident without thereafter giving him some recourse against the agency exacerbating his liability? The instant situation compels some form of restitution to preclude a negligent doctor from escaping the responsibilities for his actions, especially as here where the original injuries were minor as compared with Ms. Bissonette's current disabilities. We agree with the district court that equity and good conscience should afford the initial tortfeasor a remedy.

Having noted in Hertz that the doctrines of indemnity and contribution among subsequent tortfeasors are not cognizable under Florida law, we turn to subrogation. Subrogation is an equitable doctrine whereby the initial tortfeasor/defendant is placed "in the shoes" of the plaintiff. 30 Fla.Jur. Subrogation § 11. It is a legal device "founded on the proposition of doing justice without regard to form, and was...

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 cases
  • Northern Utilities Div. of K N Energy, Inc. v. Town of Evansville
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • 10 Diciembre 1991
    ...initial tort-feasor rights against a successor tort-feasor where augmented injury existed was pursued in Underwriters at Lloyds v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 382 So.2d 702 (Fla.1980). The court recognized, which we appropriately apply here: Subrogation is an equitable doctrine whereby the in......
  • Kemper National P & C Companies v. Smith
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Pennsylvania
    • 20 Octubre 1992
    ...(followed Herrero ); 8 R. & G. Orthopedic Appliances v. Curtin, 596 A.2d 530 (D.C.App.1991) (indemnity); Underwriters at Lloyds v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 382 So.2d 702 (Fla.1980) (subrogation); Gertz v. Campbell, 55 Ill.2d 84, 302 N.E.2d 40 (1973) (indemnity); Hunt v. Ernzen, 252 N.W.2d ......
  • Kumar Corp. v. Nopal Lines, Ltd., 83-2317
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • 15 Enero 1985
    ...obliged to pay Nava's loss, Kumar would thus be subrogated to Nava's claims against the appellees. 8 See Underwriters at Lloyds v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 382 So.2d 702 (Fla.1980); Trueman Fertilizer Co. v. Allison, 81 So.2d 734 (Fla.1955); Lovingood v. Butler Const. Co., 100 Fla. 1252, 1......
  • D'AMARIO v. Ford Motor Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • 21 Noviembre 2001
    ...for all subsequent injuries including those caused by medical negligence. See Hertz Corp.; see also Underwriters at Lloyds v. City of Lauderdale Lakes, 382 So.2d 702, 703 (Fla. 1980); Association for Retarded Citizens-Volusia, Inc. v. Fletcher, 741 So.2d 520, 524-25 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Dun......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Legal theories & defenses
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Florida Causes of Action
    • 1 Abril 2022
    ...by agreement is entitled to the securities and rights of the creditor so paid.” 2. Underwriters at Lloyds v. City of Lauderdale Lakes , 382 So.2d 702, 704 (Fla. 1980). 3. Furlong v. Leybourne , 171 So.2d 1, 5 (Fla. 1964), appeal following remand , 171 So.2d 207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965). 4. Truema......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT