Morris v. Boyer
After a car accident, Morris counterclaimed against the driver (Mrs. Boyer) and her husband (allegedly vicariously liable via negligent entrustment), and served separate proposals for settlement on each. The husband accepted and paid $50,000; the wife accepted the $49,500 proposal but claimed a setoff for the prior payment, and the trial court entered final judgment in her favor applying setoff "as a matter of law." The Sixth District reversed, holding that neither section 768.79 nor rule 1.442 authorizes entry of a final judgment upon acceptance of a proposal for settlement, and that the court could not impose a setoff not contained in the proposal's terms.
Key facts
- Morris counterclaimed against Mrs. Boyer (driver) and her husband (alleged vicarious liability for negligent entrustment) following a car accident, serving separate settlement proposals on each defendant.
- The husband accepted and paid $50,000; the wife accepted a $49,500 proposal but the trial court entered final judgment applying a setoff for the husband's prior payment, which was not a term in the wife's proposal.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Practitioners who serve or accept proposals for settlement should note that acceptance creates a contract that terminates the claim by its own terms — it does not authorize the trial court to enter judgment or graft on… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.