CopyCited 25 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 8 A.L.R. 3d 382, 1963 Fla. App. LEXIS 3571
...was being driven by Kellar unless, under "Condition 4", our financial responsibility law is applicable and has the effect of broadening the coverage of the policy so as to include liability to the plaintiff from this accident. We so hold. Basically, § 324.051(2), Fla....
...e, by its own terms, became extended so as to prevent such suspension, does this broadened coverage apply at the time of the accident so as to cover this liability? *685 These questions would cause us much difficulty if it were not for the fact that § 324.051, Fla....
CopyCited 22 times | Published | District Court, M.D. Florida | 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15335, 2007 WL 686625
...These statutory provisions clearly are of the type saved from preemption under the Graves Amendment, because they impose "financial responsibility or insurance standards on the owner of a motor vehicle for the privilege of registering and operating a motor vehicle." [12] It is Fla. Stat. § 324.051, for example, that achieves this object by authorizing the State to suspend the license and registration of a motor vehicle owner or operator who does not have the required minimum levels of motor vehicle insurance at the time of an accident....
CopyCited 19 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2008 WL 4756388
...1(9)(b)2 is in no way linked to this privilege; it does not require short term lessors to purchase insurance. The monetary figures in the statute are caps on liability unrelated to a lessor's ability to register a motor vehicle. Sections
324.021(7),
324.051, and
324.071, Florida Statutes (2007), implement Florida's financial responsibility scheme....
...r 324 has no bearing on its meaning. What the Folmar court actually said about the placement in Chapter 324 is: "Although section
324.021(9)(b) is in the financial responsibility chapter, we do not believe that the specific penalties provided for in section
324.051 apply....
...[5] The mechanism of Florida's financial responsibility law operates to ensure minimum levels of responsibility following an accident. After a motor vehicle accident, the investigating law enforcement officer must forward a report of the crash to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. § 324.051(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2007). The Department is required to suspend "the license of each operator and all registrations of the owner of the vehicles operated by such operator." § 324.051(2)(a), Fla....
...he owner or operator had in effect at the time "of the crash an automobile liability policy with respect to all of the registered motor vehicles owned by such operator or owner," containing "limits of not less than those specified in s.
324.021(7)." §
324.051(2)(b), Fla....
CopyCited 18 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15487
...State Farm Fire & Casualty Company, 8th Cir.1969,
413 F.2d 539, which was cited generally with approval by our Supreme Court in Mullis v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., supra , though not precisely for the point presently before us in the instant case. Section
324.051 F.S....
...Appellee admits that the City of St. Petersburg did not apply for or obtain a certificate of self-insurance from the Commissioner of Insurance. Appellee filed an affidavit of the Chief of the Financial Responsibility Bureau of the Department of Insurance to the effect that since §
324.051 exempted municipalities from having their operator's licenses and owners' registrations suspended within thirty days following notice of an accident, the Bureau concluded *832 that municipalities are exempt from the requirements of §
324.171....
CopyCited 14 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...He will hereinafter be referred to as "commissioner." The commissioner may take such steps as the law requires to keep the financial responsibility of the owner of an automobile current and may exact every showing within reason to do so. See §§
324.021,
324.031,
324.042,
324.051 and
324.061, Florida Statutes, F.S.A....
...In answer to this question it may be said at the outset that revocation of one's automobile license is not a peremptory act but is done after the commissioner has a full report of the accident from the department of public safety or secures such a report from reliable sources. See § 324.051, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., containing numerous *181 exemptions or exceptions....
...Then §
324.061, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., provides how amends may be made in the way of security deposit with the commissioner and §
324.071, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., provides the manner in which one's license and registration may be reinstated when suspended either under §
324.051 or §
324.072, Florida Statutes, F.S.A....
...driver's license, automobile registration certificate and automobile license tag. These were credentials required by law for owning and operating an automobile. Their suspension was in fact a punishment for not complying with §§
324.021,
324.031,
324.051 and perhaps others....
CopyCited 11 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...But in their reply brief appellants neatly reversed their field and contended that the Rules aforesaid did not apply to a license suspension under F.S. Section
324.121 et seq., F.S.A., where a judgment debtor fails to satisfy a Court judgment, but only applied to license suspensions under F.S. Section
324.051, F.S.A., relating to another state of facts entirely....
...driving licenses taken away. See also In re Sackett's Estate, Fla. App. 1965,
171 So.2d 906; Trumbull Chevrolet Sales Co., Inc. v. Motor Vehicle Commissioner, Fla.App. 1961,
134 So.2d 40. E Judicial Review of Administrative Orders under F.S. Sec.
324.051, F.S.A. The Commissioner contends in his original brief that the "Order of Suspension" entered under F.S. Sec.
324.051, F.S.A., could only be reviewed by F.S....
CopyCited 9 times | Published | Supreme Court of Florida
...ons, in that it allows suspension of drivers' licenses without a hearing on the question of culpability and treats all owners and operators of vehicles involved in an accident alike, regardless of fault. The trial court in declaring Florida Statutes §
324.051, F.S.A. unconstitutional, held: "* * * [W]ithout precise regard to the language in Section
324.011, the provisions of Section
324.051 are unconstitutional in that the classification of persons subject to the Act bears no reasonable relation to the broad subject matter of the legislation. Section
324.051 puts the non-negligent, non-liable, `uninsured' motorist or owner into the same category with the negligent, liable, `uninsured' operator or owner....
...The holding is that the lack of classification separating those at fault from those not at fault offends equal protection of the law and the failure to provide a pre-suspension hearing to determine fault denies due process of law. The lower court found that the provisions of Florida Statute §
324.051(2) (a), F.S.A. are inconsistent with the intent of the Act set out in Florida Statute §
324.011, F.S.A. [4] Section
324.051(2) (a) provides in pertinent part as follows: "Thirty days after receipt of notice of any accident involving a motor vehicle within this state which has resulted in bodily injury or death to any person, or total damage of fifty dollar...
...ent and had complied with one of the provisions of §
324.031, or "6. Such operator or owner has deposited with the state treasurer security to conform with §
324.061 and has complied with one of the provisions of §
324.031." Under Florida Statute §
324.051(2) (b), F.S.A., the above-quoted section only applies to uninsured operators or owners. The commission by regulation adopted pursuant *101 to Florida Statute §
324.042, F.S.A., has provided for a hearing limited to the exemptions set forth in Florida Statute §
324.051(2), F.S.A....
...sulting in bodily injury or property damage of $50 or more. Fault is not a consideration. The Legislature in its wisdom has determined that this event, an accident, rather than some other, will bring the Act into operation. The exemptions allowed in § 324.051(2) (a) do not change the character of the Act as operating initially without regard to fault....
...I find that on its face and in its operation the license suspension procedure of Florida's Financial Responsibility Act is patently invalid and unconstitutional. The act, in its operation, violates the equal protection provision of the Florida and United States Constitutions. The effect of Section 324.051 is to classify persons subject to the act in a manner which bears no reasonable resemblance to the purpose of the act, which is "to promote safety, and provide financial security by such owners and operators whose responsibility it is...
...However, I know of no principle of law that would prohibit the Commissioner from making a preliminary determination of possible fault or liability on the facts then before him, solely for the purpose of applying the Financial Responsibility Act. Even now, under Section 324.051(2) (a), the Commissioner must make a "quasi-judicial" determination that "no injury was caused to the person or property of anyone other than" the operator or owner; and, under Section 324.051(2) (b) par....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...s given the written consent of the plaintiff. Defendant testified on deposition that he had read the release fully before signing it but thought he was merely releasing Gonzalez so that Gonzalez could get his driver's license back in compliance with Section 324.051 F.S., F.S.A....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1990 WL 8579
...They claim that the pertinent portion of that provision is "for the purpose of determining financial responsibility." The plaintiffs contend that the foregoing phrase relates only to the issue of whether the lessor is subject to the sanctions set forth in section 324.051....
...k not only at the plain language of the statute, but also its history. Carawan v. State,
515 So.2d 161 (Fla. 1987). Although section
324.021(9) is in the financial responsibility chapter, we do not believe that the specific penalties provided for in section
324.051 apply. Section
324.051 clearly concerns sanctions against individuals in automobile accidents who do not have insurance coverage....
...y doctrine, not statutory penalties for failing to provide proof of financial responsibility. Moreover, there would have been no need to enact section
324.021(9)(b) to require $100,000/$300,000 coverage if its only purpose was to exempt lessors from section
324.051 which requires $10,000/$20,000 coverage....
CopyCited 5 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1999 WL 550790
...ibility law. Unlike the off-road motorcycle involved in that case, government-owned vehicles are not per se outside the definition of motor vehicle for purposes of chapter 324. Rather, they are "exempt from the operation" of the chapter by virtue of section 324.051(2)(a)2., Florida Statutes (1995), a subsection of the statute that otherwise calls for the suspension of licenses and registrations of operators and owners of motor vehicles involved in accidents....
...ng any bicycle or moped. However, the term `motor vehicle' shall not include any motor vehicle as defined in s.
627.732(1) when the owner of such vehicle has complied with the requirements of ss.
627.730-627.7405, inclusive, unless the provisions of s.
324.051 apply; and, in such case, the applicable proof of insurance provisions of s....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 1991 WL 110841
...They claim that the pertinent portion of that provision is "for the purpose of determining financial responsibility." The plaintiffs contend that the foregoing phrase relates only to the issue of whether the lessor is subject to the sanctions set forth in section 324.051....
...ot only at the plain language of the statute, but also its history. Carawan v. State,
515 So.2d 161 (Fla. 1987). Although section
324.021(9)(b) is in the financial responsibility chapter, we do not believe that the specific penalties provided for in section
324.051 apply. Section
324.051 clearly concerns sanctions against individuals in automobile accidents who do not have insurance coverage....
...y doctrine, not statutory penalties for failing to provide proof of financial responsibility. Moreover, there would have been no need to enact section
324.021(9)(b) to require $100,000/$300,000 coverage if its only purpose was to exempt lessors from section
324.051 which requires $10,000/$20, 000 coverage....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 967, 2009 WL 277435
...The most significant sanction imposed under these statutes is not the liability of the owner (which already existed in Florida under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine), but rather the loss of a driver's license or registration for someone who has not been financially responsible in the past. See § 324.051, Fla....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | District Court of Appeal of Florida
...ns that the relief prayed by plaintiff in his complaint be granted and that a decree be entered accordingly. Reversed. CARROLL, DONALD K, Chief Judge and RAWLS, J., concur. . Ch. 29963, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1955. . F.S. §
324.011, F.S.A. . F.S. §
324.051, F.S.A....
CopyAgo (Fla. Att'y Gen. 1981).
Published | Florida Attorney General Reports
...324.121 , F.S.? 2. Does a discharge in bankruptcy relieve an uninsured motorist from the requirements of the financial responsibility law where the driving or registration privileges of such person have been suspended pursuant to the provisions of s.
324.051 (2)(a), F.S.? a. Following suspension pursuant to s.
324.051 , F.S., and before expiration of one year, what is the effect of receipt of a discharge in bankruptcy in light of the provisions of s.
324.051 (2)(a)7.? b. What is the effect of a discharge in bankruptcy received by the department at a hearing authorized by s.
324.051 (2)(a), F.S. (Rule 15A-3.02, F.A.C.), for a suspension under that provision when the hearing is held (1) before the effective date of suspension, (2) following the effective date of suspension? a. Equal, for purposes of s.
324.051 (2)(a)4., a judgment of nonliability by a court of competent jurisdiction; or SUMMARY: Although a discharge in bankruptcy operates to stay collection of a judgment arising out of an automobile accident and bars its enforcement, the discharge does not: 1. Relieve an uninsured motorist from the provisions of ss.
324.121 and
324.131 , F.S., regarding future financial responsibility; 2. Relieve an uninsured motorist from the provisions of s.
324.051 (2)(a), F.S., regarding future financial responsibility; b. Relieve suspension of driving privileges under under s.
324.051 (2)(a), F.S., regardless of whether the hearing is held prior or subsequent to the discharge....
...ponsibility on the same basis as all other motorists under ss.
324.121 and
324.131 , F.S. Revision of the Bankruptcy Code has not changed the prior opinion of this office; the answer to your first question is again in the negative. AS TO QUESTION 2: Section
324.051 (2)(a), F.S. provides that within 30 days of receipt of an accident report as defined in s.
324.051 (1), the department shall suspend, after due notice and hearing, the license of each operator and all registrations of the owner of the vehicles operated by such operator whether or not involved in such accident unless such operator or owner is exempted under s.
324.051 (2)(a)1.-7., or excepted from the operation of subsection (2) by s.
324.051 (2)(b)1.-5. Because suspension of driving privileges under s.
324.051 (2)(a) is based on the specified damages caused by an accident and embodied in a written accident report rather than from any tort judgment arising out of or resulting from the accident, a discharge in bankruptcy has no real bearing on the suspension. You have drawn my attention to s.
324.051 (2)(a)4. regarding an adjudication of non-liability, and have questioned whether a discharge in bankruptcy, for purposes of this section, is the equivalent of a judgment of non-liability by a court of competent jurisdiction. Section
324.051 (2)(a)4....
...ollection; where there has been no judgment of liability, a discharge in bankruptcy can have no real effect. The answer to your second question is also in the negative. In Questions 2(a) and 2(b) you have drawn my attention also to the provisions of s.
324.051 (2)(a)7., F.S. and to s.
321.051 (2)(a) regarding hearings, and have questioned whether a discharge in bankruptcy has an effect on either of these procedures. In response to Question 2(a), it is clear that s.
324.051 (2)(a)7....
...after the filing of a complaint in a court of competent jurisdiction, a discharge cannot come into play where a complaint is not filed, thus a discharge has no effect on this section. In response to Question 2(b) regarding hearings held pursuant to s. 324.051 (2)(a), a discharge in bankruptcy has no bearing on the hearings because suspension of license or registration under this section turns on the damages and/or injuries caused by the accident and reflected in the accident report, and not on any ability of the owner or operator to pay damages....
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 1971 Fla. LEXIS 3633
...May 24, 1971), we find the summary judgment must be reversed. Florida’s financial responsibility law, like Georgia’s consideration in Bell, provides for the suspension of driving licenses even if the licensee is in no way liable for the accident. (F.S. § 324.051(2) (a), F.S.A.) Our decision in Williams v....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida
...Cooper,
233 F.2d 500 (4th Cir. 1956). . Carter v. National Automobile Ins. Co. (Fla.App.1961)
134 So.2d 864 . . Jefferson Insurance Company v. Fischer, (Fla.1964)
166 So.2d 129 . .Howard v. American Service Mutual Insurance Co. (Fla.App.1963)
151 So.2d 682, 683 . .F.S. §§
324.051(2);
324.131;
324.031, F.S.A. . F.S. §§
324.021(7);
324.021(8); 324.-151(1), F.S.A. . F.S. §
324.051(2), F.S.A....
