Estock v. Krstic

I respectfully dissent. The record is devoid of any indication that Krstic was negligent in operating his boat. Estock failed to adduce, both in her presentation to the jury and her proffer to the trial court, any evidence establishing that Krstic had breached the highest degree of care imposed by section 327.32, Florida Statutes (1981), on an owner-operator of a motorboat.1 Krstic’s act of accelerating while crossing the wake of another boat is not sufficient to establish negligence. Estock’s bare allegation of intoxication is similarly inadequate to show that Krstic’s faculties were…