Drunk Driving Accidents

If you were hit by a drunk driver in Florida, you have stronger legal options than the average car accident victim—including the right to seek punitive damages without the usual statutory cap. Florida Statute § 768.736 specifically removes the punitive damages cap in cases where the defendant was driving with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08% or higher, which is one of the most plaintiff-favorable rules in the country for DUI crash victims. Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada has handled Florida drunk driving accident claims for victims across Miami-Dade, Broward, and Collier Counties since 1976, and we built this page to help you understand how Florida law treats these cases differently from a routine collision.

• A driver in Florida is legally impaired at a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) of 0.08% or higher under Florida Statute § 316.193.
• Under Florida Statute § 316.1934, a BAC of 0.08% or higher is prima facie evidence of impairment in a civil case.
• A DUI conviction is admissible in your civil case as evidence that the drunk driver was negligent.
• Florida Statute § 768.736 removes the statutory cap on punitive damages when the defendant was driving with BAC of 0.08% or higher or with impaired faculties.
• Florida’s dram shop law (§ 768.125) is narrow—bars and restaurants are generally only liable for serving someone underage or knowingly serving someone habitually addicted to alcohol.
• Florida’s dangerous instrumentality doctrine makes the vehicle owner liable for damages caused by anyone they allow to drive their car, including a drunk driver.
• Under modified comparative fault rules in Florida Statute § 768.81(6), if you are found more than 50% at fault, you cannot recover any damages.
• The deadline to file a Florida drunk driving accident lawsuit is generally 2 years from the date of the crash under Florida Statute § 95.11(5)(a) for accidents occurring on or after March 24, 2023.

A DUI conviction against the at-fault driver is one of the strongest pieces of evidence available in a Florida civil case, and it generally makes proving the driver’s negligence much easier. Florida Statute § 316.193 makes it a crime to drive with a BAC of 0.08% or higher or with normal faculties impaired by alcohol or drugs. When the at-fault driver is convicted of DUI, that conviction is admissible in your civil personal injury case as proof of the underlying conduct.

You do not need to wait for a criminal conviction to file your civil claim, and you can win your civil case even if the criminal case ends in acquittal. The two systems use different standards of proof—the criminal case requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but your civil claim only needs to show that your version of events is more likely true than not. Under Florida Statute § 316.1934, a BAC of 0.08% or higher is prima facie evidence that the driver’s normal faculties were impaired, which means the burden shifts to the defense to explain it away. Below 0.08, the test result is still admissible, but the presumption no longer applies and other evidence of impairment becomes more important.

If you were hit by a driver who was arrested or charged with DUI, the experienced attorneys at Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada can review your case at no cost.

Florida law generally caps punitive damages at the greater of three times compensatory damages or $500,000 under Florida Statute § 768.73, but Florida Statute § 768.736 removes that cap entirely in DUI cases. This is the single most important rule for any drunk driving crash victim to understand. The statute provides that the cap in § 768.73 and the elevated burden of proof in § 768.725 do not apply to any defendant who, at the time of the conduct for which punitive damages are sought, was under the influence of alcohol or drugs to the extent of impaired faculties or had a blood or breath alcohol level of 0.08% or higher. The reference to § 768.725 is widely understood by Florida practitioners to relax the clear-and-convincing-evidence burden in DUI cases, though the case law on that point is not entirely uniform.

Punitive damages are designed to punish the defendant and deter future conduct, and they are available under Florida Statute § 768.72 when the plaintiff proves by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant was guilty of intentional misconduct or gross negligence. The Florida Supreme Court recognized as early as 1976 in Ingram v. Pettit, 340 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1976), that voluntary intoxication behind the wheel can support a punitive damages claim. The combination of these statutes—§ 768.72 making punitive damages available, and § 768.736 removing the cap—is why DUI cases can produce verdicts substantially larger than typical car accident cases.

Call (877) 448-8585 to talk with one of our attorneys about whether punitive damages may apply to your case. The consultation is free, and you pay nothing unless we recover compensation for you.

In many Florida drunk driving cases, the drunk driver is not the only party legally responsible for your injuries—and identifying every liable party often makes the difference between a claim limited to the driver’s insurance and a recovery that actually covers your losses. Florida law allows recovery against several types of additional defendants in DUI crashes.

The vehicle owner under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine. Florida has applied the dangerous instrumentality doctrine to motor vehicles since the 1920 Florida Supreme Court case Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Anderson, 80 Fla. 441, 86 So. 629 (Fla. 1920). The doctrine holds the owner of a vehicle vicariously liable for damages caused by anyone they entrust with that vehicle, including a drunk driver. If the at-fault driver was operating a car they borrowed, leased, or were employed to drive, the owner of that vehicle is generally on the hook regardless of whether they knew the driver was impaired. One important caveat: under Florida Statute § 324.021(9)(b)3, a vehicle owner who is not also actively negligent and who is not a lessor in the business of leasing has their vicarious liability capped at $100,000 per person and $300,000 per incident for bodily injury, plus $50,000 in property damage—with higher caps if the operator was uninsured or underinsured. This cap is a meaningful limitation on recovery from the owner alone, which is one reason identifying every other potentially liable party (including any commercial defendant) matters.

The bar, restaurant, or social host under Florida’s dram shop law. Florida Statute § 768.125 limits dram shop liability narrowly to two situations: when the establishment willfully and unlawfully sold or furnished alcohol to someone underage, or when it knowingly served someone “habitually addicted” to alcohol. Unlike many other states, Florida does not impose dram shop liability simply because a bar over-served a visibly intoxicated adult patron. The narrow exception that does exist requires specific evidence—typically eyewitness testimony, server records, or the patron’s history at that establishment. The firm’s Florida negligent alcohol sale page covers these claims in more detail.

The employer of an on-duty driver. If the drunk driver was operating a vehicle in the course of their employment, the employer may be liable under both vicarious liability and direct theories like negligent hiring or negligent retention. This is especially common in commercial vehicle and rideshare cases.

Your own UM/UIM coverage. If the drunk driver was uninsured or underinsured, your own uninsured motorist coverage often becomes the primary source of recovery. UM coverage is one of the most important—and most underused—protections in Florida auto insurance.

Florida moved from pure comparative fault to modified comparative fault on March 24, 2023, and the change matters in DUI cases just like in any other Florida negligence claim. Under Florida Statute § 768.81(6), any party found to be more than 50% at fault for their own injuries is completely barred from recovering damages. If you are 50% or less at fault, your recovery is reduced by your percentage of fault.

In most DUI crash cases, the drunk driver is found overwhelmingly at fault and comparative fault is not a meaningful issue. But insurance carriers will still try to push some percentage onto the injured plaintiff—for things like alleged speeding, lane position, or, in passenger cases, whether you knew the driver was impaired before getting in the car. Florida Statute § 768.36 also bars recovery entirely for an injured plaintiff who had a BAC of 0.08% or higher and was found more than 50% at fault for their own harm because of that intoxication. This rule cuts the other way against drunk plaintiffs but is rarely applicable when you were the sober victim of someone else’s DUI.

DUI crashes in South Florida often produce catastrophic injuries—traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord damage, fractures, and wrongful death—and the legal framework for these cases is more favorable to the victim than almost any other type of motor vehicle claim. Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada has handled Florida drunk driving accident cases since 1976, including punitive damages claims under § 768.72, dram shop claims against bars and restaurants, and dangerous instrumentality claims against vehicle owners. When the crash results in a fatality, the case often proceeds as a Florida wrongful death claim under the Florida Wrongful Death Act, with the surviving family members as the proper plaintiffs.

To talk with one of our Miami DUI accident attorneys about your case, call Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada at (305) 448-8585 or contact us online. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The consultation is free, and you pay nothing unless and until we recover compensation for you.