Walt Disney World v. Wood

515 So.2d 198 (1987)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
W
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Walt Disney World v. Wood

Florida Supreme Court
515 So.2d 198 (1987)

  • Written by Lauren Petersen, JD
Play video

Facts

Aloysia Wood (plaintiff) and her fiancé, Daniel Wood, visited Walt Disney World (Disney) (defendant). While at the Grand Prix attraction, Daniel rammed the rear of the car that Aloysia was driving. Aloysia was injured. Aloysia and Daniel later married. Aloysia sued Disney, and Disney sought contribution from Daniel. Under Florida state law, liability between joint tortfeasors must be determined using a standard of comparative negligence. Florida law also allows for defendants to be held jointly and severally liable for a plaintiff’s injuries. A jury found that Aloysia was 14 percent at fault, Disney was 1 percent at fault, and Daniel was 85 percent at fault. Additionally, the jury determined that Aloysia’s damages were $75,000. The trial court entered judgment against Disney for 86 percent of Aloysia’s damages. Disney appealed, arguing that because Florida has comparative negligence, joint and several liability is inherently unfair, particularly if the plaintiff is at fault. Disney suggested that damages should be apportioned according to each defendant’s relative fault. Aloysia argued that most jurisdictions that have adopted comparative negligence have retained joint and several liability, in part to ensure that a plaintiff is compensated in full for her injury regardless of the financial situation of the defendants.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Grimes, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 811,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Torts

Key Terms

Related Videos