The Bumper Car Case

The Claim:

A Florida theme park was ordered to pay 86 percent of a woman's award for injuries received on its "Grand Prix" ride, even though the park was found only 1 percent at fault and the woman's husband -- who rammed his car into hers -- 85 percent at fault.

The Truth:

This case demonstrates the value of joint and several liability, a doctrine that ensures that those harmed by the acts of others will be compensated for their injuries.

Aloysia Wood was injured in November 1971 at Disney's "Grand Prix" ride when her then-fiance Daniel hit the rear of the vehicle she was driving. The jury assessed her damages at $75,000.

The court ordered Disney to pay both its percentage of the damages plus Daniel's amount -- Daniel being unable to cover his portion.

What was not mentioned in the editorial was the fact this is how joint liability operates and that this is the legislative standard under Florida law.

Joint and several liability reflects the first purpose of our tort system: compensation for those injured due to no fault of their own. While harm is apportioned among the defendants in a trial, situations sometimes arise where one defendant eludes either through bankruptcy or flight the reach of the court. Should we let the innocent injured citizen suffer by receiving less than the compensation it has been determined he or she is entitled to? Should this person and his or her family be jeopardized yet again? Or should one or more of the defendants responsible for the harm be held accountable?

Cite: Walt Disney World Co. v. Wood, 489 So. 2d 61 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986).