Products Liability Law Reporter
Transportation
You must be a Products Liability Law Reporter subscriber to access this content.
If you are a member of the Products Liability Section or a subscriber, log in below. Not yet a Section member? Join today!
Join the Products Liability SectionAlready a subscriber? Log in
Florida substantive law applied to claims against Florida defendants in suit arising out of overseas incident
December 2024/January 2025A federal district court held that Florida substantive law applied to a case against Florida defendants in an action based on an overseas incident-related death allegedly caused by a product created in the state by a Florida business.
The estate of Shirley Cohen sued Key Safety Systems, Inc., and Key Automotive of Florida, LLC, alleging liability for designing and manufacturing a defective air bag inflator that allegedly led to Cohen’s death in Israel. The defendants moved to apply Israeli substantive law to the action. Under Israeli compensation law, the estate would be required to pursue payment exclusively from Cohen’s private insurer in Israel, which would result in dismissal.
Denying the defense motion, the court noted that Israel’s courts are unaffected by the parties litigating their dispute under Florida law and that no insurance company is a party to the cause of action. Moreover, the court said that the defense offered nothing to show how Israel’s policy, including limiting insurance companies’ exposure to litigation, suffered by applying Florida law here.
The court also found that no true conflict of laws was present in the parties’ dispute. Instead, there was a false conflict—applying Florida tort law in Florida to a business involved in Florida litigation advanced Florida policy, but applying Israel’s compensation law to the dispute advanced no Israeli policy. Applying the most significant relationship test from Restatement Second, Conflict of Laws, the court found that it was relevant where the injury occurred, but also where the conduct that caused the injury occurred, where the parties resided, and where the relationship between the parties was centered.
In light of these factors, the court concluded, the defendants’ motion to apply Israeli substantive law was unreasonable.
Citation: Cohen v. Key Automotive of Fla., LLC, 2024 WL 4033334 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 30, 2024).
Plaintiff counsel: AAJ members Kevin Dean, John D. O’Neill, Thomas D. Hoyle, and W. Christopher Swett, all of Mount Pleasant, S.C.; and AAJ member Marc Rothenberg, New York City.