Pedestrian Accident Complaint - Florida

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (PEDESTRIAN COLLISION) — FLORIDA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Parties, Jurisdiction, and Venue
3. General Factual Allegations
4. Count I — Negligence (Against Defendant Driver)
5. Count II — Negligence Per Se (Against Defendant Driver)
6. Count III — Vicarious Liability / Dangerous Instrumentality (Against Defendant Owner)
7. Damages
8. Conditions Precedent
9. Prayer for Relief
10. Demand for Jury Trial
11. Signature and Service Blocks
12. Florida Practice Notes
13. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE [____] JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR [COUNTY] COUNTY, FLORIDA

Case No. [____________]

Division: Civil

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (PEDESTRIAN COLLISION) AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, [PLAINTIFF NAME], sues Defendants, [DEFENDANT DRIVER NAME] and [DEFENDANT OWNER NAME], and alleges:

2. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. This is an action for damages that exceeds $50,000, exclusive of interest, costs, and attorney's fees, and is within the subject-matter jurisdiction of this Court under Art. V, § 5, Fla. Const., and § 26.012, Fla. Stat.

2. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] ("Plaintiff") is a resident of [COUNTY] County, Florida, is over the age of 18, and is otherwise sui juris. At the time of the Subject Crash, Plaintiff was a pedestrian lawfully on or crossing a public roadway.

3. Defendant [DEFENDANT DRIVER NAME] ("Defendant Driver") is [a resident of [COUNTY] County, Florida / a nonresident], is sui juris, and at all relevant times operated a [YEAR / MAKE / MODEL] motor vehicle (the "Subject Vehicle").

4. Defendant [DEFENDANT OWNER NAME] ("Defendant Owner") is [an individual resident of [COUNTY] County / a [State] corporation/LLC authorized to do business in Florida] and at all relevant times was the titled owner of the Subject Vehicle.

5. The collision giving rise to this action (the "Subject Crash," defined below) occurred in [COUNTY] County, Florida.

6. Venue under § 47.011, Fla. Stat., is proper in this Court because [☐ one or more Defendants reside in this county ☐ the cause of action accrued in this county ☐ property in litigation is located in this county]. Section 47.011 does not apply to actions against nonresidents; conducting business is not stated as an independent ground in that section.

3. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

7. On [__/__/____] at approximately [TIME] (the "Crash Date"), Plaintiff was lawfully proceeding on foot [crossing the roadway within a marked crosswalk / crossing within an unmarked crosswalk at the intersection / crossing with the pedestrian signal / lawfully upon the roadway] on [STREET / ROADWAY] at or near [INTERSECTION / LOCATION] in [COUNTY] County, Florida (the "Subject Crash").

8. At the same time and place, Defendant Driver was operating the Subject Vehicle, owned by Defendant Owner, in the same vicinity.

9. Defendant Driver negligently [DESCRIBE CONDUCT — e.g., failed to stop and remain stopped for Plaintiff in the crosswalk in violation of § 316.130, failed to yield the right-of-way, failed to maintain a proper lookout, turned across Plaintiff's path, drove carelessly], causing the Subject Vehicle to strike Plaintiff.

10. At all material times Plaintiff proceeded with due care, [within a crosswalk / with the pedestrian signal in Plaintiff's favor], and in compliance with the traffic laws of the State of Florida, and was plainly visible to a driver exercising reasonable care.

11. As a direct and proximate result of the Subject Crash, Plaintiff was struck and thrown to the roadway and sustained serious bodily injuries, including but not limited to [LIST INJURIES — e.g., orthopedic fractures, traumatic brain injury, spinal injury, internal injuries, disfiguring lacerations].

12. Because a pedestrian has no structural protection, restraint system, or crumple zone against the forces of a motor vehicle, the Subject Crash caused Plaintiff to suffer injuries materially more severe than those typically sustained by an occupant of an enclosed vehicle.

13. The [name of law-enforcement agency] responded and prepared Florida Traffic Crash Report No. [____], [and cited Defendant Driver for violation of § [____], Fla. Stat.].

14. Plaintiff received emergency care at [HOSPITAL] and has since undergone [MEDICAL TREATMENT SUMMARY], with care ongoing.

4. COUNT I — NEGLIGENCE (Against Defendant Driver)

15. Plaintiff readopts and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 14 as though fully set forth herein.

16. Defendant Driver owed Plaintiff a duty to operate the Subject Vehicle with reasonable care under the circumstances, to obey Florida's traffic laws, to stop or yield to a pedestrian crossing within a crosswalk, to exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian, and to keep a proper lookout for pedestrians and other roadway users.

17. Defendant Driver breached that duty by one or more of the following acts or omissions:

• Failing to stop and remain stopped, or to yield the right-of-way, to Plaintiff crossing within a crosswalk (§ 316.130(7), § 316.075, Fla. Stat.);
• Turning across Plaintiff's path of travel while Plaintiff lawfully crossed the roadway;
• Failing to exercise due care to avoid colliding with Plaintiff (§ 316.130(15), Fla. Stat.);
• Failing to maintain a proper and careful lookout for pedestrians;
• Operating the Subject Vehicle at an excessive or imprudent speed;
• Operating the Subject Vehicle while distracted; and/or
• Operating the Subject Vehicle in a careless manner in violation of § 316.1925, Fla. Stat.

18. Defendant Driver's breach was the direct and proximate cause of the Subject Crash and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

19. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has suffered the damages set forth in Section 7 below.

5. COUNT II — NEGLIGENCE PER SE (Against Defendant Driver)

20. Plaintiff readopts and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 19 as though fully set forth herein.

21. At the time of the Subject Crash, the following statutes imposed mandatory duties on Defendant Driver, enacted to protect the class of persons to which Plaintiff belongs (pedestrians and other roadway users) from the type of harm that occurred:

• § 316.130(7), Fla. Stat. — the driver of a vehicle shall stop and remain stopped, or shall yield the right-of-way (slowing or stopping if need be), to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk under the specified signal, signage, and no-signal conditions;
• § 316.130(15), Fla. Stat. — every driver of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian, shall give warning when necessary, and shall exercise proper precaution upon observing any child or any obviously confused or incapacitated person;
• § 316.075, Fla. Stat. — vehicular traffic shall yield the right-of-way to pedestrians lawfully within the intersection or an adjacent crosswalk; and
• [OTHER SECTION CITED OR APPLICABLE].

22. Defendant Driver violated one or more of those statutes, and such violation constitutes evidence of negligence (and, where the statute is a strict-liability traffic regulation, negligence per se) under Florida law, which was a proximate cause of the Subject Crash and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

6. COUNT III — VICARIOUS LIABILITY / DANGEROUS INSTRUMENTALITY (Against Defendant Owner)

23. Plaintiff readopts and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 22 as though fully set forth herein.

24. The Subject Vehicle is a "dangerous instrumentality" under Florida common law. At the time of the Subject Crash, Defendant Owner was the owner of the Subject Vehicle and entrusted it to Defendant Driver, who operated it with Defendant Owner's knowledge and consent.

25. Under Florida's dangerous-instrumentality doctrine, and/or by respondeat superior where Defendant Driver acted within the course and scope of employment or agency, Defendant Owner is vicariously liable for the negligence of Defendant Driver.

26. In the alternative, Defendant Owner negligently entrusted the Subject Vehicle to Defendant Driver with actual or constructive knowledge of Defendant Driver's incompetence or unfitness, which was a proximate cause of the Subject Crash and Plaintiff's damages.

7. DAMAGES

27. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' conduct, Plaintiff has sustained and seeks recovery of:

• Economic damages: past and future medical, hospital, surgical, and rehabilitative expenses; past lost earnings; future loss of earning capacity; and property damage to Plaintiff's clothing, personal effects, and assistive devices.
• Non-economic damages: past and future bodily injury, pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement and permanent scarring, mental anguish, inconvenience, and loss of the capacity for the enjoyment of life.

28. The injuries are either permanent or continuing in nature, and Plaintiff will suffer the losses in the future.

8. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT

29. All conditions precedent to the maintenance of this action have been performed, have occurred, or have been waived.

9. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, for compensatory damages exceeding $50,000, together with costs of this action taxable under § 57.041, Fla. Stat., pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law, and such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

10. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable as a matter of right pursuant to Art. I, § 22, Fla. Const., and Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.430.

11. SIGNATURE AND SERVICE BLOCKS

Date: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], Esq.

Florida Bar No. [________]

Counsel for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, STATE ZIP]

Telephone: [NUMBER] | Email: [PRIMARY E-SERVICE EMAIL]

12. FLORIDA PRACTICE NOTES

• Statute of limitations — 2 years. Post-HB 837 (eff. March 24, 2023), § 95.11(5)(a), Fla. Stat., shortened general negligence claims from 4 years to 2 years for causes accruing on or after that date. Confirm the accrual date.
• Negligence regime — modified comparative fault, 51% bar. § 768.81(6), Fla. Stat. (2023): a plaintiff more than 50% at fault recovers nothing; otherwise recovery is reduced by the plaintiff's fault share.
• Driver duties. § 316.130 (stop/yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk under subsection (7); due care to avoid any pedestrian under subsection (15)); § 316.075 (signal devices; yield to pedestrians); § 316.1925 (careless driving).
• Pedestrian PIP. A pedestrian may have first-party PIP medical (own policy, then resident relative, then the striking vehicle's PIP, per § 627.736(4)(e)); PIP does not pay pain and suffering, and the § 627.737 permanency threshold generally applies to a pedestrian's non-economic recovery. Confirm before pleading.
• UM/UIM and hit-and-run. Identify and pursue the pedestrian's own UM/UIM (§ 627.727); BI liability is not mandatory in Florida, and hit-and-run/phantom-vehicle UM is available subject to corroboration.
• Forum and venue. Circuit Court (§ 26.012); venue under § 47.011.

13. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• § 95.11(5)(a), Fla. Stat. (2-year negligence limitation, per 2023 HB 837) — http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/
• § 768.81, Fla. Stat. (comparative fault; 51% bar) — https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0768/Sections/0768.81.html
• § 316.130, Fla. Stat. (pedestrians; traffic regulations — driver stop/yield; due care) — https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2025/0316.130
• § 316.075, Fla. Stat. (traffic control signal devices); § 316.1925 (careless driving)
• § 627.736, § 627.737, § 627.732, Fla. Stat. (PIP / no-fault; pedestrian coverage order; threshold)
• § 627.727, Fla. Stat. (uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage)
• § 26.012, § 47.011, § 57.041, Fla. Stat.; Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.430
• HB 837 (2023 tort reform) — https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/837
• deJesus v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R., 281 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 1973) (negligence per se)

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in Florida must review and customize this document before filing. Laws, citations, and court rules change frequently; verify all authorities before use.