A Florida court has ordered a new trial in a motorcycle accident case involving Leslie Crocker and Michael Rein. The District Court of Appeal of Florida ruled on November 13, 2026, that the jury was improperly instructed on the legal concept of res ipsa loquitur, which led to the reversal of the original verdict. This decision affects both parties and highlights the complexities of proving negligence in personal injury cases.

The case, Crocker v. Rein, docket number 2D2024-2805, centers around an incident where Ms. Crocker was a passenger on Mr. Rein's motorcycle when it lost control and crashed, resulting in injuries to Ms. Crocker. The court's ruling emphasizes the importance of proper jury instructions in determining liability and negligence in personal injury cases.

Background

Leslie Crocker was riding as a passenger on a motorcycle driven by Michael Rein when the vehicle lost control and crashed off the road. The accident resulted in injuries to Crocker, but the cause of the crash was unclear. There was no evidence of a collision, road debris, intoxication, or mechanical failure. The uncertainty surrounding the cause of the accident became a central issue in the case.

During the trial, Mr. Rein testified that the motorcycle began to fishtail after Ms. Crocker leaned forward to point out her daughter's residence. An expert for Ms. Crocker acknowledged that a passenger's movements could affect a driver's control but believed that Crocker's actions were not sufficient to cause the loss of control. The expert also admitted that other factors, such as environmental hazards, could have contributed to the accident.

The case reached the District Court of Appeal after both parties filed appeals following a jury trial. Ms. Crocker contested an order granting a new trial, while Mr. Rein challenged a partial summary judgment and a jury instruction related to res ipsa loquitur, a legal doctrine that allows for an inference of negligence in certain situations.

The Ruling

The court ruled that the res ipsa loquitur instruction given to the jury was erroneous. The judges explained that the instruction should not have been provided because the elements required for its application were not met in this case. The court stated, "The evidence in the case was actually undisputed that Mr. Rein was not in exclusive control over the motorcycle while Ms. Crocker was a passenger."

The judges further noted that the evidence showed that motorcycles can crash without any negligence on the part of the driver. They emphasized that the instruction had the potential to mislead the jury by allowing them to infer negligence without sufficient evidence. The court concluded, "The error in giving this instruction was not harmless... the burden was on Ms. Crocker to affirmatively establish negligence in the first instance."

Judges Khouzam, Northcutt, and LaRose concurred in the decision to reverse and remand for a new trial, stating that the improper jury instruction significantly impacted the outcome of the case.

Impact

This ruling underscores the importance of precise jury instructions in personal injury cases, particularly those involving negligence claims. The decision clarifies that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is not applicable in every situation, especially in automobile accident cases where multiple factors can contribute to an incident.

The ruling may have broader implications for future personal injury cases in Florida, as it reinforces the need for plaintiffs to meet the burden of proof in establishing negligence. This case also highlights the challenges faced by victims of accidents in proving liability when the circumstances surrounding the incident are ambiguous.

What's Next

The case will now return to the lower court for a new trial, where the jury will be instructed correctly regarding the elements of negligence. It remains to be seen if either party will seek further appeals following the new trial.