From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shor v. Paoli

Supreme Court of Florida
Jan 27, 1978
353 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 1978)

Summary

In Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla. 1977), this Court allowed a tortfeasor to recover contribution from the negligent spouse of an injured plaintiff, where both the negligent spouse and the non-spouse tortfeasor contributed to the accident causing the injuries, even though a direct action by the injured spouse against the negligent spouse would not have been allowed because of the doctrine of family immunity.

Summary of this case from Joseph v. Quest

Opinion

No. 51915.

November 17, 1977. Rehearing Denied January 27, 1978.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Broward County, L. Clayton Nance, J.

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:

"The doctrine of family or interspousal immunity is based on the desirability of the preservation of the family unit. The law of contribution of joint tortfeasors is meant to apportion the responsibility to pay innocent injured third parties between or among those causing the injury.

"In the case at bar it was determined that both Paoli and Shor caused the injury. Shor's husband collected 100% of his damages from Paoli. To say that Shor doesn't have to contribute and account for her wrongdoing would be unfair to Paoli and a windfall to Shor. This is not a case where the husband sued the wife on account of her negligence so we are not doing any real damage to the doctrine. This is a case where the joint tortfeasor sued the joint tortfeasor and we are ruling in support of that statute."

We agree with the rationale of the District Court of Appeal and find that it has correctly answered the certified question in the negative. Insofar as Mieure v. Moore, 330 So.2d 546 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), is inconsistent herewith, it is overruled.

Accordingly, we approve the decision of the District Court under review and discharge the writ.

It is so ordered.

ADKINS, Acting C.J., and ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Shor v. Paoli

Supreme Court of Florida
Jan 27, 1978
353 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 1978)

In Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla. 1977), this Court allowed a tortfeasor to recover contribution from the negligent spouse of an injured plaintiff, where both the negligent spouse and the non-spouse tortfeasor contributed to the accident causing the injuries, even though a direct action by the injured spouse against the negligent spouse would not have been allowed because of the doctrine of family immunity.

Summary of this case from Joseph v. Quest

In Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla. 1977), this Court held that under the Uniform Contribution Among Tortfeasors Act, section 768.31, Florida Statutes (1979), a tortfeasor could seek contribution from another person whose negligence had contributed to the plaintiff's injuries, even though the other person was immune from a direct action by virtue of a family relationship (marriage) with the plaintiff.

Summary of this case from Woods v. Withrow

In Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla. 1977), a third party tortfeasor was permitted to obtain contribution from the cotortfeasor spouse of the plaintiff.

Summary of this case from Godales v. Y.H. Investments Inc.

In Shor, suit was brought by a third party, joint tort-feasor, for contribution from the wife for a tort committed by the wife against the husband.

Summary of this case from Treciak v. Treciak

In Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla. 1977), affirming, 345 So.2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), the supreme court recognized that the common law doctrine of interspousal immunity did not control over section 768.31, Florida Statutes, the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act, where one tortfeasor seeks contribution from the tortfeasor-spouse of the injured person.

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Sch. Bd. of Palm Beach Cty

In Shor, the court quoted approvingly from the opinion of this court in which it was said, "To say that Shor doesn't have to contribute and account for her wrongdoing would be unfair to Paoli and a windfall to Shor."

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Sch. Bd. of Palm Beach Cty

In Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla. 1977), our supreme court held that interspousal immunity did not prevent one tort-feasor from seeking contribution from another tort-feasor when the second tort-feasor was the spouse of the injured person who received damages from the first tort-feasor. The court later reiterated this holding in Florida Farm Bureau Insurance Co. v. Government Employees Insurance Co., 387 So.2d 932 (Fla. 1980), and pointed out that the existence of insurance coverage was immaterial to the disposition of the question.

Summary of this case from Pennington v. Dye

permitting a negligent tortfeasor to seek contribution from a wife whose negligence contributed to the injuries caused her husband

Summary of this case from Orlando Sports Stadium v. Gerzel

In Shor v. Paoli, 353 So.2d 825 (Fla. 1978), the court upheld the trial court decision that the common-law doctrine of interspousal immunity did not control over the Uniform Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors' Act so as to prevent one tortfeasor from seeking contribution from another tortfeasor when the other tortfeasor was the spouse of the person injured in an auto accident who received damages from the first tortfeasor.

Summary of this case from 3-M Elec. Corp. v. Vigoa
Case details for

Shor v. Paoli

Case Details

Full title:MINNIE BERGER SHOR, AND ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION…

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Jan 27, 1978

Citations

353 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 1978)

Citing Cases

Quest v. Joseph

See 3-M Elec. Corp. v. Vigoa, 369 So.2d 405 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Nevertheless, our Supreme Court in Shor v.…

Joseph v. Quest

The district court framed the issue as whether a defendant has a right of contribution against the parent of…