Dooley v. Harris, 97-3542
| Decision Date | 07 August 1998 |
| Docket Number | No. 97-3542,97-3542 |
| Citation | 1998 WL 454044,714 So.2d 1206 |
| Parties | 23 Fla. L. Weekly D1859 Ryan S. DOOLEY, Appellant, v. Carrie T. HARRIS, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Kristine R. Kutz of Killgore Pearlman, Orlando, for Appellant.
Andrew P. Rock of Rissman, Weisberg, Barrett, Hurt, Donahue & McLain, P.A., Orlando, for Appellee.
Ryan Dooley appeals from a final summary judgment in favor of Carrie Harris in his personal injury action. Dooley was injured when he was struck by a vehicle owned by Harris. At the time of the accident, the car was being driven by Terri Barner, who had taken the vehicle from Harris without permission. Dooley contends that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether Barner had implied consent to take the vehicle or whether her theft of the vehicle was reasonably foreseeable. We disagree and affirm the judgment below.
The dangerous instrumentality doctrine imposes vicarious liability upon the owner of a motor vehicle who gives express or implied consent to another to operate that motor vehicle. Hertz Corp. v. Jackson, 617 So.2d 1051 (Fla.1993); Fought v. Mullen, 609 So.2d 726 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). Limited exceptions to this doctrine have been recognized. For example, a breach of custody amounting to a species of conversion or theft will relieve the owner of responsibility for the negligence of one to whom the owner has granted consent to operate the vehicle. Hertz; Fought. However, if a theft is reasonably foreseeable, then the owner will not be relieved of liability. Hendeles v. Sanford Auto Auction, Inc., 364 So.2d 467 (Fla.1978); Vining v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 354 So.2d 54 (Fla.1977).
There is no evidence here from which a jury could reasonably find implied consent by Harris to Barner, or that Barner's theft of the vehicle was reasonably foreseeable. Harris and Barner were acquaintances. Harris allowed Barner to stay in her home a few days after Barner had been released from jail on a probation violation for a DUI conviction. Barner was waiting for her mother to send a ticket for her to return to Pennsylvania. Barner had no driver's license. If she needed to go anywhere, Harris or someone else would drive her. Barner never used anyone's car.
Before leaving her home for a few days, Harris told Barner that if she needed to go anywhere, Harris' son would drive her. Harris left her car locked in a closed garage. She believed that she left her car keys in her jewelry box. Upon her return after the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tkaczevski v. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc., 95 Civ. 5743(LBS).
...entrusts it to another. See Hertz Corp. v. Jackson, 617 So.2d 1051, 1053 (Fla.1993); see also Dooley v. Harris, 714 So.2d 1206, 1998 WL 454044, at *1 (Fla. Dist.Ct.App. Aug.7, 1998). Under Pennsylvania law, by contrast, "the lessor of a motor vehicle is generally not liable for the negligen......
-
Ming v. Interamerican Car Rental, Inc., 5D04-2222.
...issue of fact existed regarding consent and that a jury should resolve that issue. We affirmed a summary judgment in Dooley v. Harris, 714 So.2d 1206 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), finding no evidence of implied consent. We noted that the driver and owner were only acquaintances. The owner allowed th......
-
Christenson-Sullins v. Raymer, 1D99-2583.
...testimony. Accordingly, Bisel's testimony is not uncontroverted as asserted by the dissent. In fact, the court in Dooley v. Harris, 714 So.2d 1206 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998), cited by Judge Miner in his dissent, pointed out in affirming a summary judgment in favor of the owner of a car, that the o......
-
Depriest v. Greeson, CASE NO. 1D16–0807
...of consent necessary to maintaining a cause of action under Florida's dangerous instrumentality doctrine. See, e.g., Dooley v. Harris , 714 So.2d 1206 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (affirming summary judgment upon finding no evidence of implied consent in undisputed facts).Rather than use the Ming fa......