Jordan v. Kelson, s. 73--652 and 73--653
| Decision Date | 26 July 1974 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 73--652 and 73--653,s. 73--652 and 73--653 |
| Citation | 299 So.2d 109 |
| Parties | Virginia Winchester JORDAN et al., Appellants, v. Stanley L. KELSON et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Larry A. Klein, Cone, Wagner, Nugent, Johnson & McKeown, West Palm Beach, for appellants.
George P. Supran, Jones, Paine & Foster, West Palm Beach, for appellee-Kelson.
John B. Ostrow, Huebner, Shaw & Bunnell, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee-Allstate.
Appellants-plaintiffs, Virginia Winchester Jordan, Bruce Jordan, a minor, by and through this father and next friend, Ernest Jordan, and Ernest Jordan, individually, appeal a final judgment entered in favor of the appellees-defendants, Stanley L. Kelson and Welthy M. Kelson, in a cause of action seeking damages resulting from an automobile accident. We reverse.
Defendants, Stanley L. Kelson and Welthy M. Kelson, were owners of a 1969 Chevrolet. On the morning of July 12, 1972, Mrs. Kelson delivered the automobile to Cornell and Sons Automobile Repair Shop for repairs. That evening, after repairs had been completed, defendant Daniel Cornell called Mrs. Kelson and advised her that the car could be picked up. When Mrs. Kelson indicated that it would be difficult for her to come to the repair shop to get the automobile, Cornell agreed to deliver the vehicle to Mrs. Kelson at her home. While en route to the Kelson residence, Cornell, driving the Kelson automobile, was involved in an accident with an automobile owned by plaintiff, Ernest Jordan. The occupants of the Jordan vehicle, Virginia Winchester Jordan and her son, Bruce Jordan, suffered various injuries from the collision.
Subsequently, suit was filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants, Carl Cornell and Daniel Cornell, a partnership doing business as Cornell and Son; Stanley L. Kelson and his wife, Welthy M. Kelson; and Allstate Insurance Company, the Kelson's insurer. Various pretrial motions were made and depositions taken. The defendants Kelson and Allstate Insurance Company each moved for a summary judgment. The trial court granted the motions and entered summary final judgment in favor of the Kelsons and Allstate Insurance Company. This appeal then followed.
The question submitted for our determination in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in entering summary final judgments in favor of the Kelsons and Allstate Insurance Company determining that an owner of a motor vehicle is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Newton v. Caterpillar Fin. Servs. Corp.
...person to whom the device has been entrusted. Rippy , 80 So.3d at 306 ; Meister , 462 So.2d at 1072 (quoting Jordan v. Kelson , 299 So.2d 109, 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974) ). Both Rippy and Meister then examine factors to decide if the particular devices at issue, a farm tractor and a golf cart,......
-
Rippy v. Shepard
...by anyone operating it with his knowledge and consent.” Meister, 462 So.2d at 1072 (emphasis omitted) (quoting Jordan v. Kelson, 299 So.2d 109, 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)). When we first applied the dangerous instrumentality doctrine to an automobile in Southern Cotton Oil Co., we examined at ......
-
Saullo v. Douglas
...with his knowledge and consent." Meister v. Fisher, 462 So.2d 1071, 1072 (Fla.1984); see also Southern Cotton Oil Co.; Jordan v. Kelson, 299 So.2d 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974), cert. denied, 308 So.2d 537 (Fla. In order for the dangerous instrumentality doctrine to apply the person held vicariou......
-
Roman v. Bogle
...for misuse of this instrumentality by anyone operating it with his knowledge and consent.462 So.2d at 1072 (quoting Jordan v. Kelson, 299 So.2d 109, 111 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)) (emphasis omitted). The court in Rippy again reiterated that “[t]he doctrine is based on ‘the practical fact that the......