Let’s say you get into a car crash in Broward, Palm Beach, or anywhere else in Florida, and you suffer some pretty serious injuries as a result of the crash. Let’s also say that the driver who crashed into you ran a red light or failed to yield the right of way, or that the driver was in some other way negligent. Under these circumstances, who is liable for the crash? Who can you sue? Obviously, the driver who was negligent and crashed into you is liable for your injuries.
But is that it? What about the owner of the vehicle? Can the owner have any liability for the car accident, even if he wasn’t the one driving the vehicle that crashed into you?
What is the Dangerous Instrumentality Doctrine in Florida?
In Florida, we have something called the dangerous instrumentality doctrine. In its most basic form, the dangerous instrumentality doctrine makes the owner of a motor vehicle liable for injuries caused by someone else who was driving the vehicle with the owner’s permission.
So, think of it like this. You own a car. Your friend comes to you and asks you to borrow your car. You agree and let your friend drive your car. If, due to your friend’s negligence, your friend gets into a car accident and causes injury to somebody else, then you, as the owner of the car your friend was driving, can be sued for your friend’s negligence that caused the crash. In this scenario, the person who was injured due to your friend’s negligence does not have to prove that you (the vehicle owner) did anything wrong. Instead, the claim against you is based simply on your ownership of the car and your grant of permission to your friend to drive your car.
This concept of the vehicle owner being liable even if he wasn’t negligent may seem a little strange at first. But this dangerous instrumentality doctrine is nothing new. In fact, it’s been the law in Florida for probably around 100 years. The dangerous instrumentality rule is actually a very important concept in Florida personal injury law, and we deal with it at our office nearly every day. It’s especially important for our clients because, in some cases, the driver who caused the accident may have little or no insurance coverage, whereas the owner of the vehicle may have a separate insurance policy that has a greater amount of coverage.
What Does it Mean to Give a Person Permission to Use a Vehicle?
Permission is the key issue when dealing with the dangerous instrumentality doctrine: did the owner give the driver permission to use the vehicle?
Now, keep in mind that permission to use the vehicle can be either express or implied consent.
With express consent, the owner explicitly allowed the driver to use the vehicle. For example, the owner may have verbally told the driver that he can use the vehicle.
When it comes to implied consent, there may not be an obvious statement such as “yes, go ahead and drive the car.” For implied consent, you have to look at the specific circumstances to determine whether such consent exists. For example, there may be a prior history where the driver repeatedly used the vehicle, and the owner never told him to stop using it. That type of situation would likely be enough to establish implied consent under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine.
Under the Dangerous Instrumentality Doctrine, Are There Any Limits to the Vehicle Owner’s Financial Liability?
Although the owner of a vehicle can be liable for the driver’s negligence, that doesn’t mean that the owner’s liability is unlimited. A person (and this means a human person, not a company) who owns a vehicle and permits another person to drive it is liable only up to $100,000 per person, $300,000 per incident, for bodily injury, and $50,000 for property damage.
If the driver of the motor vehicle is uninsured or has insurance with limits less than $500,000 combined property damage and bodily injury liability, then the owner can be liable for up to an additional $500,000 in economic damages. This additional liability would be reduced by any amounts recovered from the driver or the driver’s insurance coverage.
There are a few circumstances where these limits for the person who owns the vehicle don’t apply. For example, if the person who owns the vehicle was himself negligent in entrusting the vehicle to the driver, then the financial liability limits would be inapplicable in a claim based upon the owner’s own negligence in entrusting the vehicle to the driver. Also, the owner liability limits won’t apply when the vehicle is being used for commercial activity in the owner’s ordinary course of business.
These are just two examples of when the owner’s liability limits might not apply after a Florida car accident. Determining whether the liability limits will apply can sometimes be a little complicated, and they may not apply the same way in every case.
Call Our Office Today for a Free Consultation
If you were injured in a car crash anywhere in Florida and have questions about whether and how the dangerous instrumentality doctrine applies in your case, call our office today at (954) 833-1440 for a free consultation.