Robert L. Christensen v. Mary Jo Bowen
140 So. 3d 498
| Fla. | 2014Background
- Florida Supreme Court reviews Fifth DCA decision in Bowen v. Taylor-Christensen, 98 So.3d 136 (Fla.5th DCA 2012) on certified great public importance question.
- Christensen’s purchase; title issued to him and his wife as co-owners; he paid and signed jointly, but the title listed as Mary G. Taylor-Christensen or Robert L. Christensen.
- Accident involved Taylor-Christensen driving with Christensen’s co-ownership; Bowen sued for wrongful death; Christensen argued he was not vicariously liable under the beneficial ownership exception.
- Trial court denied directed verdict; the jury found Christensen was not an owner; Fifth DCA reversed, certifying the public-importance issue.
- Court answers that a co-owner on the certificate of title is a beneficial owner and liable, rejecting subjective-intent defenses; remands with decision affirming the Fifth DCA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the beneficial ownership exception apply to a joint titleholder who never intended to use the vehicle? | Christensen asserts no ownership due to lack of intent and use. | Bowen asserts co-owners are liable due to identifiable ownership rights. | No; beneficial ownership extends to joint titleholders, regardless of use or explicit intent. |
| Is a joint titleholder who has not divested ownership still liable under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine? | Christensen did not control or use the vehicle. | Joint titleholders retain control rights and thus liability. | Yes; joint titleholders retain ownership rights and are liable. |
| Is subjective intent relevant to determining beneficial ownership under Florida's statutes and case law? | Subjective intent should negate ownership. | Subjective intent is legally immaterial to ownership. | No; objective legal rights establish ownership regardless of subjective intent. |
Key Cases Cited
- Palmer v. R. S. Evans, Jacksonville, Inc., 81 So.2d 635 (Fla. 1955) (beneficial ownership when titleholder retains control)
- Metzel v. Robinson, 102 So.2d 385 (Fla. 1958) (titleholder’s ability to exert dominion governs ownership)
- McAfee v. Killingsworth, 98 So.2d 738 (Fla. 1957) (extends Palmer to pre-transfer ownership situations)
- Aurbach v. Gallina, 753 So.2d 60 (Fla. 2000) (control without title alone not enough for liability; requires beneficial ownership)
- Kraemer v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 572 So.2d 1363 (Fla. 1990) (purpose of doctrine is to ensure recourse for injuries by those with ownership interest)
- Hertz Corp. v. Dixon, 193 So.2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966) (titleholder enabling driver to obtain vehicle imposes liability)
- Ritz, Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Co. v., 284 So.2d 474 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (co-titleholders liable when title placed in names and use permitted)
- Johnson v. Deangelo, 448 So.2d 581 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (subjective intent irrelevant to ownership)