Florida
Truck Accident Laws in Florida (2026): Deadlines & Liability
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 16, 2026). · Reviewed by the RecordingLaw editorial team. · Law checked current as of August 16, 2026. · 5 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content
A wreck with a tractor-trailer is not just a larger car accident. A fully loaded commercial truck can outweigh a passenger car many times over, the injuries are often catastrophic, and the case typically involves a trucking company, federal safety regulations, and multiple potential defendants. Florida also adds a wrinkle most states do not: it is a no-fault state, so the path to suing the at-fault trucker runs through a specific injury threshold. If a commercial truck hurt you in Florida, the deadline, the fault rule, and the no-fault threshold all shape your claim from the start.
This page explains Florida's deadline, its negligence rule, and how its no-fault PIP system works, then covers the federal trucking rules that apply nationwide. It is general legal information, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship.
The Deadline to Sue in Florida
Florida significantly shortened its negligence deadline in 2023. Under Fla. Stat. section 95.11, as amended by House Bill 837, a negligence action must be filed within two years for causes of action that accrue after March 24, 2023. The old rule allowed four years, so older guidance you may find online can be wrong for a recent crash. For most truck collisions, the two-year clock runs from the date of the crash.
Wrongful death claims in Florida are also subject to a two-year deadline, generally measured from the date of death. Florida's deadlines are strict, and filing late almost always ends the case regardless of its strength. Some situations, such as a claim against a government entity, carry their own notice rules and timelines, so confirming the exact deadline early is important.
How Florida Divides Fault
HB 837 also changed how Florida treats a plaintiff's own fault. Florida used to follow pure comparative negligence, which let an injured person recover even if mostly at fault. Now, under the amended Fla. Stat. section 768.81, Florida applies modified comparative negligence with a 51% bar: you can recover only if your share of fault is 50% or less, and you recover nothing if you are found more than 50% at fault.
When you recover, the court reduces your damages by your percentage of fault. If your damages are $400,000 and you are 30% at fault, your recovery falls to $280,000. Because the new bar gives insurers a strong incentive to push the injured person's fault past the 50% line, how fault is documented and contested matters more than ever in Florida truck cases. (Note: medical-malpractice claims remain under the older pure comparative standard, but that exception does not apply to ordinary truck crashes.)
No-Fault and the PIP Threshold in Florida
Florida is a no-fault state. Drivers must carry personal injury protection (PIP), which pays a portion of your own medical bills and lost wages, typically up to $10,000, regardless of who caused the crash. Because the system is no-fault, you cannot automatically sue the at-fault driver for pain and suffering. You must first step outside no-fault by meeting the serious-injury threshold.
That threshold is not universal, and the limit matters in truck cases. Both subsections of Fla. Stat. section 627.737 reach only an owner, registrant, operator, or occupant of a motor vehicle "with respect to which security has been provided as required by ss. 627.730-627.7405." A nonresident owner is required to carry that security only once the vehicle has been physically present in Florida for more than 90 days during the preceding 365 days (Fla. Stat. section 627.733(2)), and section 627.737 does not apply at all to a vehicle used as a taxicab (Fla. Stat. section 627.733(1)(b)). An out-of-state rig on an interstate run is the common truck-crash fact pattern, and for it the threshold may not be the automatic gate it is for a Florida-insured car, so this is worth checking early rather than assuming.
Under Fla. Stat. section 627.737, you may recover non-economic damages such as pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience only if the injury consists in whole or in part of one of these: (a) significant and permanent loss of an important bodily function; (b) permanent injury within a reasonable degree of medical probability, other than scarring or disfigurement; (c) significant and permanent scarring or disfigurement; or (d) death.
Because commercial trucks are so heavy, truck crashes frequently cause exactly these kinds of permanent, life-altering injuries, so many truck cases do clear the threshold. But it is a genuine legal test, not a formality. Temporary pain is not enough, and permanency generally must be established with medical evidence. Once the threshold is met, you can pursue the at-fault driver and carrier for the full range of damages.
Damage Caps in Florida
Florida does not cap compensatory damages in ordinary personal injury or wrongful death cases, so you can seek the full measure of economic and non-economic losses once you are outside the no-fault system. Punitive damages are the exception, and Florida caps those by statute today. Under Fla. Stat. section 768.73, a punitive award generally may not exceed the greater of three times the compensatory damages awarded to the claimant or $500,000. The ceiling rises to the greater of four times compensatory damages or $2 million where the factfinder determines the wrongful conduct was motivated solely by unreasonable financial gain and that the unreasonably dangerous nature of the conduct, with the high likelihood of injury from it, was actually known to the defendant's managing agent, director, officer, or other policy-making decisionmaker. There is no cap where the defendant had a specific intent to harm the claimant. Punitive claims do get made against motor carriers in serious truck cases, so this is live law rather than a historical footnote.
Minimum Insurance in Florida
Florida's baseline requirements for ordinary vehicles are unusually low: $10,000 in property damage liability and $10,000 in PIP, with no mandatory bodily-injury liability for most drivers. Those are car numbers, and Florida law does not apply them to trucks.
Florida sets its own commercial-vehicle floor in Fla. Stat. section 627.7415. A commercial motor vehicle operated on Florida roads must carry combined bodily injury and property damage liability coverage of at least $50,000 per occurrence at a gross vehicle weight of 26,000 to 34,999 pounds, $100,000 per occurrence at 35,000 to 43,999 pounds, and $300,000 per occurrence at 44,000 pounds or more, in addition to any other applicable requirement. A vehicle subject to U.S. Department of Transportation regulation must instead meet the federal minimum levels of financial responsibility in 49 CFR part 387, discussed below. So an intrastate Florida truck that never comes under the federal rule still carries far more coverage than a car, and that is state law doing the work.
Federal FMCSA Rules That Shape Truck Cases
Most commercial trucks are governed by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations enforced by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). These rules apply in every state, and a violation is often strong evidence of negligence. Florida also adopts them for purely intrastate trucking, but not word for word: under Fla. Stat. section 316.302(1)(b), owners and drivers of commercial vehicles engaged in intrastate commerce are subject to 49 CFR parts 382-386 and 390-397 as those rules existed on December 31, 2023, and Florida substitutes its own driving-hour limits, described in the first bullet below.
- Hours of service (49 CFR Part 395): A property-carrying driver may drive a maximum of 11 hours after 10 consecutive hours off duty, may not drive beyond the 14th hour after coming on duty, must take a 30-minute break after 8 hours of driving, and is capped at 60 hours in 7 days or 70 hours in 8 days. Fatigue and falsified logs are recurring problems. A driver operating solely in intrastate commerce in Florida, and not carrying hazardous materials in placardable amounts, follows different numbers: no driving more than 12 hours after 10 consecutive hours off duty, none after the 16th hour on duty, and none after 70 hours on duty in any 7 consecutive days or 80 hours in any 8 consecutive days if the carrier runs every day of the week (Fla. Stat. 316.302(2)(b) and (c)).
- Electronic logging devices (ELDs): Most drivers must run an ELD that automatically records driving time, duty status, and location, which makes hours-of-service violations harder to hide.
- Driver qualification and CDL: Carriers must confirm that drivers hold the proper commercial driver's license and meet medical and qualification standards.
- Drug and alcohol testing: FMCSA requires pre-employment, random, post-accident, and reasonable-suspicion testing for safety-sensitive drivers.
- Vehicle maintenance and inspection (49 CFR Part 396): Carriers must systematically inspect, repair, and maintain their vehicles and keep records. Brake and tire failures often trace back to skipped maintenance.
Who Can Be Liable After a Truck Accident
A car crash usually means one other driver. A truck crash often involves a chain of businesses, and several of them can share responsibility:
- The driver, for negligent or reckless operation.
- The motor carrier (trucking company), both vicariously for its driver acting in the scope of employment and directly for negligent hiring, training, supervision, or retention.
- A broker or shipper, in some circumstances tied to how the load or carrier was arranged.
- A cargo loader, if an improperly secured or overloaded load contributed to the crash.
- A parts or equipment manufacturer, if a defective brake, tire, or other component failed.
Identifying every responsible party matters because it can open access to multiple insurance policies, a key difference from a typical car-accident case.
Federal Minimum Insurance for Trucks
Under 49 CFR 387.9, for-hire motor carriers operating in interstate commerce and hauling general (non-hazardous) freight in vehicles rated at 10,001 pounds or more must maintain at least $750,000 in liability coverage. Carriers transporting certain hazardous materials must carry $1,000,000 or $5,000,000. These federal floors dwarf a typical passenger-car policy, which is part of why truck cases are valued differently from car cases.
Why Preserving Evidence Early Matters
Much of the strongest evidence in a truck case sits inside the truck and the carrier's files. ELD and logbook data, the engine control module (ECM) or onboard event recorder often called the black box, dash-camera footage, and maintenance and inspection records can be overwritten, recycled, or lost on routine schedules. Sending a spoliation, or evidence preservation, letter to the carrier early can require it to hold this data before it is gone. The police report, photographs of the scene and vehicles, and your medical records are also central and should be secured promptly. The carrier's own records can be overwritten on routine schedules, so get a free claim review from a Florida truck accident lawyer and have the preservation letter sent early (attorney advertising).
How to Evaluate a Truck Accident Claim
Most personal injury attorneys review truck cases on a contingency-fee basis, meaning the fee comes out of any recovery rather than up front, and many offer a free initial consultation. No lawyer can promise a particular outcome or dollar figure, and every case depends on its own facts and evidence. The practical steps stay the same: get medical care and follow through, keep the police report and your records, document your losses, and confirm the exact deadline for your situation, because Florida's deadlines are strict and a missed date usually forfeits the claim.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the deadline to sue for a truck accident in Florida?
For negligence claims that accrue after March 24, 2023, generally 2 years from the date of the crash under Fla. Stat. 95.11, shortened from 4 years by HB 837. Wrongful death is also 2 years, usually from the date of death. Filing late almost always ends the claim, so confirm your exact deadline early.
Do I have to meet a threshold to sue the trucker in Florida?
Yes. Florida is a no-fault PIP state, so to sue for pain and suffering you must meet the serious-injury threshold in Fla. Stat. 627.737: a significant and permanent loss of an important bodily function, a permanent injury, significant and permanent scarring or disfigurement, or death. Severe truck-crash injuries often clear it, but it must be proven with medical evidence. The threshold also applies only to a vehicle that was required to carry Florida no-fault security, so it may not gate a claim against an out-of-state truck passing through (Fla. Stat. 627.733).
Who can be sued after a truck accident in Florida?
Often more than one party: the truck driver, the motor carrier (both for its driver's conduct and for negligent hiring, training, or supervision), and sometimes a broker or shipper, a cargo loader, or the manufacturer of a defective part. Identifying every responsible party can open access to multiple insurance policies.
How is a truck accident different from a car accident?
Trucks are far heavier, so injuries tend to be more severe. Commercial trucks are also governed by federal FMCSA rules on driving hours, logs, maintenance, and licensing, and interstate freight carriers must carry at least $750,000 in liability coverage. Truck cases also typically involve multiple, often corporate, defendants and time-sensitive electronic evidence.
Updates
Added Florida's own intrastate hours-of-service limits and commercial insurance minimums, corrected the punitive damages cap as current law, and noted that the no-fault injury threshold applies only to vehicles required to carry Florida no-fault security.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Governing law re-checked for recent changes
Reviewed and approved by an editor
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Florida Statutes
§ 627.737Tort exemption; limitation on right to damages; punitive damages.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
(1) Every owner, registrant, operator, or occupant of a motor vehicle with respect to which security has been provided as required by ss. 627.730-627.7405, and every person or organization legally responsible for her or his acts or omissions, is hereby exempted from tort liability for damages because of bodily injury, sickness, or disease arising out of the ownership, operation, maintenance, or use of such motor vehicle in this state to the extent that the benefits described in s. 627.736(1) are payable for such injury, or would be payable but for any exclusion authorized by ss. 627.730-627.7405, under any insurance policy or other method of security complying with the requirements of s. 627.733, or by an owner personally liable under s. 627.733 for the payment of such benefits, unless a person is entitled to maintain an action for pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience for such injury under the provisions of subsection (2). (2) In any action of tort brought against the owner, registrant, operator, or occupant of a motor vehicle with respect to which security has been provided as required by ss.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.fl.us
Cited in 62 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lasky v. State Farm Insurance Company (Supreme Court of Florida 1974, 296 So. 2d 9)“…ainst an attack under the equal protection clause. Under Fla. Stat. § 627.737 , F.S.A., entitled "Tort Exemption," th…”
- Valdes v. Ruas (District Court of Appeal of Florida 1978, 354 So. 2d 1269)“…f $1000, and (2) the injuries were permanent in nature. See Section 627.737, Florida Statutes (1975). Appellees filed a motion, as am…”
- Tucker v. Walker (District Court of Appeal of Florida 1976, 335 So. 2d 636)“…or medical expenses in excess of $1,000, as required under Fla. Stat. § 627.737 . We disagree and affirm. Once a fina…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Florida Car Accident Laws: No-Fault, PIP, and Your Claim
§ 768.81Comparative fault.In forcecited in 7 of our articles
(1) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section, the term:(a) “Accident” means the events and actions that relate to the incident as well as those events and actions that relate to the alleged defect or injuries, including enhanced injuries. (b) “Economic damages” means past lost income and future lost income reduced to present value; medical and funeral expenses; lost support and services; replacement value of lost personal property; loss of appraised fair market value of real property; costs of construction repairs, including labor, overhead, and profit; and any other economic loss that would not have occurred but for the injury giving rise to the cause of action. (c) “Negligence action” means, without limitation, a civil action for damages based upon a theory of negligence, strict liability, products liability, professional malpractice whether couched in terms of contract or tort, or breach of warranty and like theories. The substance of an action, not conclusory terms used by a party, determines whether an action is a negligence action.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.fl.us
Cited in 153 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):American Home Assur. v. NAT. RR CORP. (2005) held a vicariously liable party has the active tortfeasor's negligence apportioned to it under section 768.81, reducing its recovery. Wal-Mart Stores v. McDonald (1996) held the statute does not let a negligent defendant shift fault to the intentional actor it had a duty to guard against.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- D'ANGELO v. Fitzmaurice (Supreme Court of Florida 2003, 863 So. 2d 311)✓A pad was left in a patient during an appendectomy; the hospital settled and the surgeon kept it off the verdict form. The court held Section 768.81 applies even with one defendant listed, so he got an economic damages setoff but none for noneconomic damages.
- American Home Assur. v. NAT. RR CORP. (Supreme Court of Florida 2005, 908 So. 2d 459)✓An Amtrak train hit a rig hauling an 82 ton turbine at a crossing; answering a certified question, the court held Section 768.81 cuts a vicariously liable claimant's own recovery by the active tortfeasor's share, since chargeable fault is not limited to direct negligence.
- Wal-Mart Stores v. McDonald (District Court of Appeal of Florida 1996, 676 So. 2d 12)✓McDonald was shot by an unknown assailant in a shopping center parking lot and sued the store and landlord for negligent security; the court held Section 768.81 does not reach intentional criminal conduct, so the assailant was properly kept off the verdict form.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Medical Malpractice Laws in Florida (2026): Deadlines & Caps, Motorcycle Accident Laws in Florida (2026): Deadlines & Helmets, Florida Slip and Fall Laws: Proving Premises Liability in the Sunshine State
§ 95.11Limitations other than for the recovery of real property.In forcecited in 16 of our articles
Actions other than for recovery of real property shall be commenced as follows:(1) WITHIN TWENTY YEARS.—An action on a judgment or decree of a court of record in this state. (2) WITHIN FIVE YEARS.—(a) An action on a judgment or decree of any court, not of record, of this state or any court of the United States, any other state or territory in the United States, or a foreign country. (b) A legal or equitable action on a contract, obligation, or liability founded on a written instrument, except for an action to enforce a claim against a payment bond, which shall be governed by the applicable provisions of paragraph (6)(e), s. 255.05(10), s. 337.18(1), or s. 713.23(1)(e), and except for an action for a deficiency judgment governed by paragraph (6)(g). (c) An action to foreclose a mortgage. (d) An action alleging a willful violation of s. 448.110. (e) Notwithstanding paragraph (b), an action for breach of a property insurance contract, with the period running from the date of loss. (3) WITHIN FOUR YEARS.—(a) An action relating to the determination of paternity, with the time running from the date the child reaches the age of majority.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-08 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.fl.us
Cited in 698 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Merkle v. Robinson (1999) held that the significant relationship test governs conflict of law questions about section 95.11, so a claim time-barred in Florida may proceed under another state's period. Foley v. Morris (1976) applied a shortened 95.11 period to a pre-existing claim where the plaintiff still had the full new period.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Merkle v. Robinson (Supreme Court of Florida 1999, 737 So. 2d 540)✓A West Virginia patient sued a doctor's estate in Florida, where he had retired; her claim was untimely under Florida law but not West Virginia's. The court held the significant relationship test governs conflicts involving section 95.11, so West Virginia's period applied.
- Foley v. Morris (District Court of Appeal of Florida 1976, 325 So. 2d 37)✓A surgeon left a rubber drain in a patient in 1971; suit came in 1974, after Florida replaced the four-year period with the two-year medical malpractice period in section 95.11(6). The court applied the new period from its effective date and affirmed dismissal.
- State ex rel. Gerstein v. Hialeah Race Course, Inc. (Supreme Court of Florida 1971, 245 So. 2d 53)✓A state attorney sued racetrack operators over political contributions. Holding the campaign statute's four-year period unconstitutional as applied, the court ruled the general one-year limit in section 95.11(7)(a) governed, so the late complaint was properly dismissed.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Florida Dog Bite Laws: Liability and Victim Rights, Florida Hit and Run Laws: Penalties and What to Do, Florida Debt Collection Laws: The $750 Head of Family Rule, Garnishment, and Debt Time Limits
§ 316.302Commercial motor vehicles; safety regulations; transporters and shippers of hazardous materials; enforcement.In force
(1)(a) All owners and drivers of commercial motor vehicles that are operated on the public highways of this state while engaged in interstate commerce are subject to the rules and regulations contained in 49 C.F.R. parts 382-386 and 390-397. (b) Except as otherwise provided in this section, all owners and drivers of commercial motor vehicles that are engaged in intrastate commerce are subject to the rules and regulations contained in 49 C.F.R. parts 382-386 and 390-397, as such rules and regulations existed on December 31, 2023. (c) The emergency exceptions provided by 49 C.F.R. s. 392.82 also apply to communications by utility drivers and utility contractor drivers during a Level 1 activation of the State Emergency Operations Center, as provided in the Florida Comprehensive Emergency Management plan, or during a state of emergency declared by executive order or proclamation of the Governor. (d) Except as provided in s. 316.228 for rear overhang lighting and flagging requirements for intrastate operations, the requirements of this section supersede all other safety requirements of this chapter for commercial motor vehicles.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.fl.us
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2021
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Walters v. American Coach Lines of Miami, Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 2009, 575 F.3d 1221)“…T safety standards, which Florida has adopted as well. See Fla. Stat. § 316.302. ACLM does not pay its drivers overtim…”
- Richard Samson v. Federal Express Corporation (Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 2014, 746 F.3d 1196)“…391.41(b)(3) and 391.43(e), relating to diabetes. Fla. Stat. § 316.302(2)(j) (emphasis added). This explains h…”
- Creese v. Bald Eagle Towing & Recovery (District Court, M.D. Florida 2021)“…le is—by state law—subject to a host of DOT regulations. Fla. Stat. § 316.302(b); see also 49 C.F.R. § 383.3 (requiri…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 627.733Required security.In force
(1)(a) Every owner or registrant of a motor vehicle, other than a motor vehicle used as a school bus as defined in s. 1006.25 or limousine, required to be registered and licensed in this state shall maintain security as required by subsection (3) in effect continuously throughout the registration or licensing period. (b) Every owner or registrant of a motor vehicle used as a taxicab shall not be governed by paragraph (1)(a) but shall maintain security as required under s. 324.032(1), and s. 627.737 shall not apply to any motor vehicle used as a taxicab. (2) Every nonresident owner or registrant of a motor vehicle which, whether operated or not, has been physically present within this state for more than 90 days during the preceding 365 days shall thereafter maintain security as defined by subsection (3) in effect continuously throughout the period such motor vehicle remains within this state. (3) Such security shall be provided:(a) By an insurance policy delivered or issued for delivery in this state by an authorized or eligible motor vehicle liability insurer which provides the benefits and exemptions contained in ss. 627.730-627.7405.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.fl.us
Cited in 20 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2017
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- STATE FARM MUT. AUTO INS. CO. v. Johnson (District Court of Appeal of Florida 1988, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2500)“…appellee's failure to have his truck insured as required by section 627.733, Florida Statutes (1985) barred his claim for personal in…”
- Kluger v. White (Supreme Court of Florida 1973, 281 So. 2d 1)“…ainst property damage loss as is, in effect, required by Fla. Stat. § 627.733 , F.S.A., with respect to other possibl…”
- Lasky v. State Farm Insurance Company (Supreme Court of Florida 1974, 296 So. 2d 9)“…ainst property damage loss as is, in effect, required by Fla. Stat. § 627.733 , F.S.A., with respect to other possibl…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 627.7415Commercial motor vehicles; additional liability insurance coverage.In force
Commercial motor vehicles, as defined in s. 207.002 or s. 320.01, operated upon the roads and highways of this state shall be insured with the following minimum levels of combined bodily liability insurance and property damage liability insurance in addition to any other insurance requirements:(1) Fifty thousand dollars per occurrence for a commercial motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight of 26,000 pounds or more, but less than 35,000 pounds. (2) One hundred thousand dollars per occurrence for a commercial motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight of 35,000 pounds or more, but less than 44,000 pounds. (3) Three hundred thousand dollars per occurrence for a commercial motor vehicle with a gross vehicle weight of 44,000 pounds or more. (4) All commercial motor vehicles subject to regulations of the United States Department of Transportation, 49 C.F.R. part 387, subparts A and B, and as may be hereinafter amended, shall be insured in an amount equivalent to the minimum levels of financial responsibility as set forth in such regulations. A violation of this section is a noncriminal traffic infraction, punishable as a nonmoving violation as provided in chapter 318.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.fl.us
§ 768.73Punitive damages; limitation.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
(1)(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c), an award of punitive damages may not exceed the greater of:1. Three times the amount of compensatory damages awarded to each claimant entitled thereto, consistent with the remaining provisions of this section; or 2. The sum of $500,000. (b) Where the fact finder determines that the wrongful conduct proven under this section was motivated solely by unreasonable financial gain and determines that the unreasonably dangerous nature of the conduct, together with the high likelihood of injury resulting from the conduct, was actually known by the managing agent, director, officer, or other person responsible for making policy decisions on behalf of the defendant, it may award an amount of punitive damages not to exceed the greater of:1. Four times the amount of compensatory damages awarded to each claimant entitled thereto, consistent with the remaining provisions of this section; or 2. The sum of $2 million.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at leg.state.fl.us
Cited in 60 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- St. John v. Coisman (District Court of Appeal of Florida 2001, 799 So. 2d 1110)“…double compensatory damages in product liability cases); Fla. Stat. § 768.73 (1) (Supp. 1993) (punitive damages in c…”
- R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Sheffield (District Court of Appeal of Florida 2019, 266 So. 3d 1230)“…sion of the punitive damages statute is the 1999 version of section 768.73, Florida Statutes, which was in effect when the instant w…”
- R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. Andy R. Allen Sr., as Personal Rep. etc. (District Court of Appeal of Florida 2017, 228 So. 3d 684)“…d of punitive damages. Chapter 99-225, section 23, amended section 768.73, Florida Statutes, to impose a stricter cap on punitive d…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Florida Punitive Damages Laws: Caps and Standards (2026), Florida Wrongful Death Laws (2026): Deadlines & Who Can Sue
Code of Federal Regulations Title 49
§ 387.9Financial responsibility, minimum levels.In forcecited in 55 of our articles
The minimum levels of financial responsibility referred to in § 387.7 are hereby prescribed as follows: Table 1 to § 387.9—Schedule of Limits—Public Liability Type of carriage Commodity transported January 1, 1985 (1) For-hire (In interstate or foreign commerce, with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,001 or more pounds) Property (nonhazardous) $750,000 (2) For-hire and Private (In interstate, foreign, or intrastate commerce, with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,001 or more pounds) Hazardous substances, as defined in 49 CFR 171.8, transported in bulk in cargo tanks, portable tanks, or hopper-type vehicles; in bulk Division 1.1, 1.2 or 1.3 materials; in bulk Division 2.3, Hazard Zone A material; in bulk Division 6.1, Packing Group I, Hazard Zone A material, in bulk Division 2.1 or 2.2 material; or highway route controlled quantities of a Class 7 material, as defined in 49 CFR 173.403 5,000,000 (3) For-hire and Private (In interstate or foreign commerce, in any quantity; or in intrastate commerce, in bulk only; with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,001 or more pounds) Oil listed in 49 CFR 172.101; hazardous waste, hazardous materials, or hazardous substances defined in 49…
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 45 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Carolina Casualty Insurance v. Yeates (2009) held an MCS-90 endorsement applies only where the underlying policy gives no coverage and the carrier's insurance falls below the minimums 49 CFR 387.9 prescribes. GREAT WEST CAS. v. General Cas. Co. of Wisconsin (2010) found that purpose met once other coverage exceeded the 387.9 amount.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- GREAT WEST CAS. v. General Cas. Co. of Wisconsin (District Court, D. Minnesota 2010, 734 F. Supp. 2d 718)“…ardous commodities is $750,000. 49 U.S.C. § 31139 (b)(2); 49 C.F.R. § 387.9 . Under the Federal Motor Carrie…”
- Carolina Casualty Insurance v. Yeates (Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit 2009, 584 F.3d 868)✓A trucker's own insurer paid the Yeateses the full $750,000 that section 387.9 sets as the minimum for non-hazardous property, and the en banc court held a second insurer's MCS-90 endorsement was therefore never triggered and added no coverage.
- American Inter-Fidelity Exchange v. American Re-Insurance Company (Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 1994, 17 F.3d 1018)✓A truck insurer sought reinsurance for $846,256 in deductibles it paid accident victims but could not collect; the court read the mandatory endorsement to require insurers to cover victims from the first dollar up to section 387.9's minimums, and reversed the dismissal.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Truck Accident Laws by State (2026): Deadlines & Liability, Truck Accident Laws in Alabama (2026): Deadlines & Liability, Truck Accident Laws in Alaska (2026): Deadlines & Liability
Sources and References
- Florida Statutes 95.11, Limitations other than for the recovery of real property (2-year negligence deadline as amended by HB 837)(leg.state.fl.us).gov
- Florida Statutes 768.81, Comparative fault (modified comparative negligence, 51% bar)(leg.state.fl.us).gov
- Florida Statutes 627.737, Tort exemption; limitation on right to damages (no-fault serious-injury threshold)(leg.state.fl.us).gov
- FMCSA, Summary of Hours of Service Regulations (49 CFR Part 395)(fmcsa.dot.gov).gov
- 49 CFR 387.9, Financial responsibility, minimum levels (the $750,000 minimum for for-hire freight carriers)(law.cornell.edu)
- 49 CFR 396.3, Inspection, repair, and maintenance of commercial motor vehicles(fmcsa.dot.gov).gov
- Florida Statutes 316.302, Commercial motor vehicles; safety regulations (intrastate hours of service and adoption of the FMCSRs as of December 31, 2023)(leg.state.fl.us)
- Florida Statutes 627.7415, Commercial motor vehicles; additional liability insurance ($50,000 to $300,000 per occurrence by gross vehicle weight)(leg.state.fl.us)
- Florida Statutes 768.73, Punitive damages; limitation (greater of 3x compensatory or $500,000, with statutory exceptions)(leg.state.fl.us)
- Florida Statutes 627.733, Required security (nonresident 90-day rule; taxicabs excluded from s. 627.737)(leg.state.fl.us)
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.