100 So. 3d 1177
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- Chronister, a scooter passenger, sustained a permanent brain injury in a car-scooter collision in Fort Lauderdale when Basora abruptly changed lanes.
- Basora admitted negligence but argued damages should be reduced by Chronister's comparative negligence for not wearing a helmet.
- Before trial, Basora moved to exclude evidence about his negligence history and other factors, which the trial court granted.
- The jury awarded Chronister approximately $11.8 million in damages, with 67% fault to Chronister and 33% to Basora, reducing total damages to about $3.83 million.
- Appellant Lenhart challenged the evidentiary ruling as preventing full consideration of comparative fault.
- The court reversed, holding the exclusion of Basora’s negligent conduct evidence impeded proper apportionment of fault.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether excluding Basora’s negligence evidence affected fault apportionment | Basora's control of the narrative hid his fault | Evidence irrelevant since Basora admitted negligence | Yes; exclusion prejudiced fault apportionment |
Key Cases Cited
- Metropolitan Dade County v. Cox, 453 So.2d 1171 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (supports that fault must be allocated when comparative negligence is involved)
- Hoffman v. Jones, 280 So.2d 431 (Fla.1973) (principles of comparative negligence framework)
- Ridley v. Safety Kleen Corp., 693 So.2d 934 (Fla.1996) (seatbelt failure treated as comparative fault)
- Special v. Baux, 79 So.3d 755 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (evidence of negligence context and prejudicial impact on verdict)
- Special v. W. Boca Med. Ctr., 90 So.3d 273 (Fla.2012) (rev.gtr. related to Special v. Baux treatment)
- Currie v. Palm Beach Cnty., 578 So.2d 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (reentry of trial for new liability/damages trial when error occurred)
- Rowlands v. Signal Constr. Co., 549 So.2d 1380 (Fla.1989) (reversal and remand for liability and damages in comparative fault context)