Cases from cite.case.law:

P. DIECIDUE, v. LEWIS,, 223 So. 3d 1015 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . which would enable a claim to be made by or on behalf of any unmarried dependent, as defined by section 768.0415 . . . Section 768.0415 allows unmarried dependent children to bring loss of consortium claims based in negligence . . . In pertinent part, section 768.0415 reads, “A person who, through negligence, causes significant permanent . . . Allstate’s waiver for loss of consortium claims, when read together with section 768.0415, is ambiguous . . . dependent(s)” as used in the waiver means an unmarried dependent child, either natural or adopted. § 768.0415 . . .

In ENGLE CASES v. LLC,, 767 F.3d 1082 (11th Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 768.0415. . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS- CONTRACT AND BUSINESS CASES, 116 So. 3d 284 (Fla. 2013)

. . . vicariously {e.g., claims against a party actively negligent and against his employer) or claims under F.S. 768.0415 . . .

A. MOORE, II, v. GILLETT, 96 So. 3d 933 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Gillett continued to pursue a claim under section 768.0415, Florida Statutes (1999), for the loss of . . .

In STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CIVIL CASES- REPORT NO. In No. In No. In No. In No. s In No. In No. In No. In No., 35 So. 3d 666 (Fla. 2010)

. . . F.S. 768.0415 does not define “significant permanent injury,” “dependent” or “permanent total disability . . . F.S. 768.0415 refers only to “negligence.” . . . vicariously {e.g., claims against a party actively negligent and against his employer) or claims under F.S. 768.0415 . . .

HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. GUILDER,, 23 So. 3d 867 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . question of statutory interpretation of a child’s right to parental consortium pursuant to section 768.0415 . . . Section 768.0415 provides that: a person who, through negligence, causes significant permanent injury . . . Since section 768.0415 allows for a cause of action against a person only for “acts of negligence occurring . . . review of the statute’s legislative history, we find that the Legislature specifically limited section 768.0415 . . .

D. HOWARD, Jr. v. RISCH, JR, 959 So. 2d 308 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 768.0415, Fla. Stat. (2003). Mr. Howard filed his lawsuit in May 2005. . . .

E. LARUSSO, S. a v. GARNER, a a a, 888 So. 2d 712 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . . § 768.0415, Fla. Stat. (1994). . . . Similarly, section 768.0415 is remedial in nature, providing a remedy for a wrong that causes injury . . . precedent, we hold that a child born alive is entitled to claim loss of consortium damages under section 768.0415 . . . Section 768.0415 speaks only to who may bring the claim, not to the extent of damages. . . . .” § 768.0415 (emphasis added). . . .

STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS- CIVIL CASES NOS., 825 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 2002)

. . . . § 768.0415 does not define “significant permanent injury,” “dependent” or “permanent total disability . . . Stat. § 768.0415 refers only to “negligence.” . . .

CRUZ, v. BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD,, 800 So. 2d 213 (Fla. 2001)

. . . Section 768.0415 provides that an “unmarried dependent” may recover for loss of parental consortium arising . . . This section shall apply to acts of negligence occurring on or after October 1, 1988. § 768.0415, Fla . . . The common law in this area has been supplanted by both section 768.0415 and Dempsey and neither of these . . . In light of the fact that the Legislature has acted in this area by promulgating section 768.0415 and . . . Just as the age of the dependent is a nonissue under section 768.0415, so too is it a nonissue under . . .

PAVOLINI v. F. BIRD, M. D. F. M. D. P. A., 769 So. 2d 410 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . For example, Stephanie would claim as a minor under section 768.0415. . . . and children of injured persons automatically qualify for a loss of consortium award or damages under 768.0415 . . . Unfortunately for the appellees, the two whose opinion will determine the outcome agree with the appellant. . 768.0415 . . . The child’s claim is based on section 768.0415, Florida Statutes, which establishes a cause of action . . .

STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS- CIVIL CASES NO., 746 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 1999)

. . . . § 768.0415,” and 6.2(h) “Unmarried dependent’s damages under Fla. . . . . § 768.0415”; and a revision to the note on use to 2.4 “Multiple Claims, Numerous Parties, Consolidated . . . Stat. § 768.0415 does not define “significant permanent injury,” “dependent” or “permanent total disability . . . Stat. § 768.0415 refers only to “negligence.” . . . Stat. § 768.0415. . . .

UNITED STATES v. DEMPSEY,, 635 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 1994)

. . . . § 768.0415, Fla.Stat. (1993). . . . Section 768.0415 limits a child’s recovery for the loss of a parent’s services, comfort, companionship . . . society to those losses caused by a significant injury “resulting in a permanent total disability.” § 768.0415 . . . injury to the parent-child relationship, the same relationship addressed by the legislature in section 768.0415 . . . legislature did recognize the claim for loss of parental companionship by the enactment of section 768.0415 . . .

TAYLOR, By M. PARKER, v. GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, a, 622 So. 2d 1169 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . requirement for derivative claims in that statute was not negated by the 1988 enactment of section 768.0415 . . .

SANDARAC ASSOCIATION, INC. a v. W. R. FRIZZELL ARCHITECTS, INC. a H. D. a, 609 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Rosen, 467 So.2d 305 (Fla.1985) with § 768.0415, Fla. . . .

GOMEZ, v. AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, INC., 596 So. 2d 510 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . complaint included two counts that sought derivative damages for the minor children, based on section 768.0415 . . . Section 768.0415 provides that A person who, through negligence, causes significant permanent injury . . .