Shor v. Paoli
| Decision Date | 17 November 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 51915,51915 |
| Citation | 353 So.2d 825 |
| Parties | Minnie Berger SHOR, and Allstate Insurance Company, a Foreign Corporation, Petitioners, v. Gerald PAOLI, Sweet & Blossom, Inc., and Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, Respondents. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Marjorie D. Gadarian, of Jones, Paine & Foster, West Palm Beach, for petitioners.
Henry Burnett, of Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Knight, Miami, for respondents.
This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari granted to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, reported at 345 So.2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).
The District Court has certified the following question for our determination:
"Does the common law doctrine of interspousal immunity control over the uniform contribution among joint tortfeasors act (75-108 Laws of Florida, Section 768.31, Florida Statutes) to prevent one tortfeasor from seeking a contribution from another tortfeasor when the other tortfeasor is the spouse of the injured person who received damages from the first tortfeasor?"
We have jurisdiction pursuant to Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution.
Petitioner's husband, David Shor, was a passenger in a motor vehicle operated by petitioner when her automobile and a vehicle operated by respondent Paoli, owned by Sweet & Blossom, Inc., collided, causing David Shor to sustain personal injuries. Respondent sued petitioner, petitioner sued respondent, and David Shor, asserting a claim for personal injuries, intervened. The jury found Paoli 65% At fault, petitioner 35% At fault and awarded David Shor $12,000 against respondents. Respondents satisfied David Shor's judgment against them and, thereafter, sought contribution from petitioner as a joint tortfeasor. She defended on grounds of interspousal immunity. Finding that interspousal immunity barred the action for contribution, the trial court entered judgment in favor of petitioners.
The District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, reversed the judgment of the trial court and reasoned:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Montgomery County v. Valk Mfg. Co.
...jurisdictions have allowed contribution despite family immunity. Paoli v. Shor, 345 So.2d 789, 790 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1977), aff'd, 353 So.2d 825, 826 (Fla.1977); Campo v. Taboada, 68 Haw. 505, 720 P.2d 181, 183 (1986); Puller v. Puller, 380 Pa. 219, 110 A.2d 175, 177 (1955); Zarrella v. Mill......
-
Renfrow v. Gojohn
...of interspousal immunity, but nevertheless permitting contribution: Paoli v. Shor, 345 So.2d 789 (Fla.App. 1977), aff'd Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla. 1978); Zarrella v. Miller, 100 R.I. 545, 217 A.2d 673 (1966); Bedell v. Reagan, 159 Me. 292, 192 A.2d 24 (1963); Fisher v. Diehl, 156 Pa......
-
Raisen v. Raisen
...we said "(t)he purpose of this policy is to protect family harmony and resources." 237 So.2d at 145. Our recent decision in Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla.1977), although holding that interspousal tort immunity did not control over the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasor's Act, d......
-
Pedigo v. Rowley
...over a 1971 pronouncement of the Idaho legislature. The Supreme Court of Florida has recently faced this same issue in Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla.1977). The court held that, notwithstanding the fact that a spouse is immune to direct action by the other spouse, a third party tortfeaso......