Soto v. McCulley Marine Services, Inc., 181 So. 3d 1223

Jose H. Medina drowned on July 4, 2009, near a staging dock in Longboat Pass after becoming separated from his stalled jet ski; his body was found under a moored barge wearing a life jacket.
Defendants McCulley Marine and Pine Island Towing had moored a tugboat and barge adjacent to a county staging dock; the Estate alleged the configuration intensified currents and created a hidden danger to recreational jet skiers.
The Estate sued for wrongful death alleging: (1) the captain negligently moored the vessels given heavy holiday jet-ski use, (2) violation of 33 C.F.R. § 162.65 (obstructing a waterway), and (3) inadequate crewing.
FWC investigated and issued no citation to the captain; the trial court had previously excluded evidence of the lack of citation but answered a jury question during trial that the captain received no citation.
The defendants emphasized the court’s statement in closing, arguing absence of a citation supported lack of negligence; the jury found no negligence and the trial court entered judgment for defendants.
On appeal the Second District reversed, holding the trial court erred by informing the jury that no citation was issued and that the Estate had not ‘‘opened the door’’ to that otherwise inadmissible evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admissibility of evidence that no citation was issued	Evidence of no citation is irrelevant and prejudicial; Estate did not open the door by asserting a regulatory-violation theory	Absence of citation is permissible because Estate alleged a regulatory violation; jury question warranted answer	Court held absence of citation is inadmissible; Estate did not open the door; answering jury that no citation was issued was reversible error
Whether regulatory-violation theory permits admission of law-enforcement decision	Arguing a Coast Guard regulation was violated is like alleging a traffic violation — it does not allow officer's citation decisions into evidence	Admission justified because Estate put the regulation in issue	Court agreed with Estate: alleging regulatory violation does not permit admission of citation evidence
Prejudice and curative instruction adequacy	Judicial statement was highly prejudicial; curative instruction could not cure the harm	Any prejudice could be cured or was harmless given other evidence	Court found the error sufficiently prejudicial to require a new trial
Trial court’s discretionary rulings re: jury question and mistrial motion	Court abused discretion by answering juror and denying mistrial	Court acted within discretion to answer juror and deny mistrial	Court reversed—ruling shows abuse in allowing inadmissible evidence via court’s answer and denying mistrial

Eggers v. Phillips Hardware Co., 88 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 1956) (absence or presence of citation inadmissible in negligence cases)
Moore v. Taylor Concrete & Supply Co., Inc., 553 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989) (compilation of cases excluding citation evidence)
Albertson v. Stark, 294 So. 2d 698 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974) (citation evidence prejudicial; should be excluded)
Galgano v. Buchanan, 783 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (questions about citations require mistrial or reversal)
Hulick v. Beers, 7 So. 3d 1153 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (absence/presence of traffic citation will almost always be prejudicial)
Diaz v. FedEx Freight E., Inc., 114 So. 3d 224 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (citation evidence inadmissible)
Shaver v. Carpenter, 157 So. 3d 305 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (reversing where officer testified a defendant violated a traffic rule)