Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 768.098 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 768.098 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 768.098

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XLV
TORTS
Chapter 768
NEGLIGENCE
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 768.098
768.098 Limitation of liability for employee leasing.
(1) An employer in a joint employment relationship pursuant to s. 468.520 shall not be liable for the tortious actions of another employer in that relationship, or for the tortious actions of any jointly employed employee under that relationship, provided that:
(a) The employer seeking to avoid liability pursuant to this section did not authorize or direct the tortious action;
(b) The employer seeking to avoid liability pursuant to this section did not have actual knowledge of the tortious conduct and fail to take appropriate action;
(c) The employer seeking to avoid liability pursuant to this section did not have actual control over the day-to-day job duties of the jointly employed employee who has committed a tortious act nor actual control over the portion of a job site at which or from which the tortious conduct arose or at which and from which a jointly employed employee worked, and that said control was assigned to the other employer under the contract;
(d) The employer seeking to avoid liability pursuant to this section is expressly absolved in the written contract forming the joint employment relationship of control over the day-to-day job duties of the jointly employed employee who has committed a tortious act, and actual control over the portion of the job site at which or from which the tortious conduct arose or at which and from which the jointly employed employee worked, and that said control was assigned to the other employer under the contract; and
(e) Complaints, allegations, or incidents of any tortious misconduct or workplace safety violations, regardless of the source, are required to be reported to the employer seeking to avoid liability pursuant to this section by all other joint employers under the written contract forming the joint employment relationship, and that the employer seeking to avoid liability pursuant to this section did not fail to take appropriate action as a result of receiving any such report related to a jointly employed employee who has committed a tortious act.
(2) An employer seeking to avoid liability pursuant to this section shall not be presumed to have actual control over the day-to-day job duties of the jointly employed employee who has committed a tortious act, nor actual control over the portion of a job site at which or from which that employee worked, based solely upon the fact that the employee at issue is a leased employee.
(3) This section shall not alter any responsibilities of the joint employer who has actual control over the day-to-day job duties of the jointly employed employee and who has actual control over the portion of a job site at which or from which the employee is employed, which arise from s. 768.096.
History.s. 29, ch. 99-225.

F.S. 768.098 on Google Scholar

F.S. 768.098 on Casetext

Amendments to 768.098


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 768.098
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 768.098.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 768.098

Total Results: 4

Haas v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1992-03-18T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 597 So. 2d 770

Snippet: 1987), appeal dismissed, 484 U.S. 1038, 108 S.Ct. 768, 98 L.Ed.2d 855 (1988). Rejecting the contention that

Miller v. State

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1991-09-26T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 597 So. 2d 767

Snippet: 1987), appeal dismissed, 484 U.S. 1038, 108 S.Ct. 768, 98 L.Ed.2d 855 (1988). The district court concluded

Taylor v. Taylor

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1930-10-27T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 130 So. 713, 100 Fla. 1009

Snippet: 344, 123 So. R. 777; Moore v. Price, 123 So. R. 768, 98 Fla. 276. In Arcadia Mercantile Co. v. Branning

Moore v. Price

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1929-07-31T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 123 So. 768, 98 Fla. 276

Snippet: Ellis, Whitfield, Buford 31 July 1929 123 So. 768, 98 Fla. 276 D. H. Doig and George C. Bedell, for