← Case library
3rd DCAJune 15, 2022Reversed and Remanded (in part); appeal of punitive damages order dismissed as untimely🔬 Novel Issue

Sager v. Blanco

Case No. 20-1194

A driver intentionally reversed his mother's car into a neighbor, was convicted of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, and the trial court entered judgment for the owner on both negligent entrustment and dangerous-instrumentality vicarious liability claims. The Third District reversed, holding that sections 772.14 and 775.089(8) estop only the criminal defendant \ not the injured victim \ from contesting the facts of the conviction, and adopting Burch's rule that weapon-like use of a vehicle defeats vicarious liability unless that use was reasonably foreseeable, an issue for the jury. The court also held the plaintiff could pursue negligent entrustment and vicarious liability as alternative theories, with procedural safeguards to limit prejudice from driving-history evidence.

Key facts

  • Driver intentionally reversed his mother's car into a neighbor, resulting in injury to the neighbor.
  • Driver was convicted of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon; trial court entered judgment for the car owner on both negligent entrustment and dangerous-instrumentality vicarious liability claims.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

The Third District expressly adopts the Fifth District's Burch framework for weaponized-vehicle cases, and the dissent contends this conflicts with the Third District's own Crespo decision and required en banc treatment… — full analysis with a trial

🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.

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.