275 So. 3d 831
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2019Background
- On Jan. 17, 2017, Samuel Rosario drove a freightliner eastbound in the center of three eastbound lanes and slowed for a red light; Jon Lopez, in a pickup, rear-ended the freightliner, propelling it into a car ahead; Lopez died from injuries.
- Rosario testified he was in the center lane, braking to stop with wheels straight and intended to continue straight when struck from behind.
- The freightliner's forward-facing dashcam shows the truck in the center lane, slowing, then a large rear impact that forces it left into the vehicle ahead.
- The Estate produced eyewitness testimony (David Mendez) claiming the freightliner swerved from the center into the left lane just before impact, and an expert affidavit concluding part of the freightliner was in the right lane at collision.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment asserting the rear-ender presumption of negligence against Lopez and arguing the dashcam video flatly contradicted and rendered the Estate's eyewitness and expert evidence incompetent.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for defendants; the appellate court reviewed whether the video so conclusively refuted the Estate’s evidence that summary judgment was proper under Florida law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether rear-ender presumption of negligence makes Lopez solely liable | Rear-end presumption exists but disputed factual evidence (eyewitness/expert) creates genuine issue as to truck movement and comparative fault | Rear-end presumption applies and video corroborates Rosario, so Lopez is presumed negligent and sole cause | Rejected as dispositive: presumption does not preclude fact issues; summary judgment improper due to conflicting evidence |
| Whether dashcam video conclusively contradicts and renders eyewitness/expert evidence incompetent | Video does not eliminate dispute; credibility and weight of eyewitness/expert create material fact for jury | Video is clear, objective, and flatly contradicts Estate's evidence, so opposing evidence is incompetent and summary judgment warranted | Court held video, though compelling, did not eliminate a genuine issue of material fact under Florida summary judgment standards; weighing credibility is for jury |
| Proper application of Florida summary judgment standard vs. Scott v. Harris (federal standard) | Florida's more restrictive standard requires resolving all reasonable inferences for non-movant; Scott is inapplicable here | Defendants relied on Scott and Wiggins to justify treating video as conclusive | Court held Scott (federal standard) and Wiggins (different proceeding) were misapplied; trial court improperly weighed evidence at summary judgment |
| Whether the appellate court should certify a question on video-evidence exception to summary judgment standards | Estate implicitly opposes any erosion of existing summary judgment protections for non-movants | Defendants likely favor an exception permitting summary judgment when unaltered video completely negates conflicting evidence | Court certified to Florida Supreme Court the question whether a video-evidence exception to Florida summary judgment rules should exist; remanded for further proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) (federal court held clear video can negate nonmoving party's version under federal summary judgment standard)
- Wiggins v. Florida Dep't of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles, 209 So. 3d 1165 (Fla. 2017) (video may justify rejecting witness testimony in administrative/license context)
- Moore v. Morris, 475 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 1985) (summary judgment only when facts crystallized and no material factual dispute remains)
- Sierra v. Shevin, 767 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (court may not weigh evidence or judge credibility on summary judgment)
- Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (1986) (federal standard allowing summary judgment where record could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for nonmoving party)