Florida Court Approves Exculpatory Clause for Rental Agreement (Pillay v. Public Storage)

Clauses from Contracts

When drafting contracts, it is advisable to use contract language which courts have already approved and enforced. This is especially true for exculpatory clauses, which must be clear and unambiguous.

In Vignaraj Munsami Pillay v. Public Storage, Inc., Florida’s Fourth District considered an appeal arising from a dispute between a renter and a storage facility. The Plaintiff claimed breach of contract and gross negligence; the application of the exculpatory clause in the rental agreement, however, led to an affirmance of summary judgment in favor of the Defendant storage facility.

Why is this important? The following language was enforced by a Florida court. Consider using this language — or compare to your existing contract language — to ensure you have a valid exculpatory clause in Florida:


(2) Owner and Owner’s agents . . . will not be responsible for, and Tenant releases Owner and Owner’s agents from any responsibility for, any loss, liability, claim, expense, damage to property . . . including without limitation any Loss arising from the active or passive acts, omission or negligence of Owner or Owner’s agents.

(3) Tenant has inspected the Premises and the Property and hereby acknowledges and agrees that Owner does not represent or guarantee the safety or security of the Premises or the Property or any of the personal property stored therein, and this Rental Agreement does not create any contractual obligation for Owner to increase or maintain such safety or security.

Two caveats:

One, do not just cut and paste the foregoing into your contract and think you are protected. It needs to fit with the other language of your agreement. This is critically important. You need to ensure defined terms are correct, the scope is accurate, and that you are covering risks which are specific to you. A good lawyer should be able to do this for a few hundred dollars. Enforcing an exculpatory clause and ended a lawsuit against you is worth a few hundred dollars now.

Two, keep in mind that the plaintiff was a non-lawyer representing himself. It is possible that not all viable arguments were raised since the party represented himself. It can happen.

Photo by Steve Johnson on Unsplash

Clauses from Contracts
Is a Forum Selection Clause Mandatory When It Says Both “Exclusive” and “May Be Brought in…”? (Ecovirux, LLC v. Biolpedge)

The parties negotiated a contract and, in the final form, the forum selection clause read as follows: The debate over whether this clause was PERMISSIVE or MANDATORY came down to a question whether the phrase “exclusive venue” controlled over “may be brought in…” Other issues were whether this was a …

Clauses from Contracts
Florida Court Declines to Apply Exculpatory Clause to Strict Products Liability Clause, Citing (Never Seen Before) “Clear” Public Policy (Harrell v. BMS Partners LLC dba Broward Motorsports)

Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal opined yesterday that Florida has a “clear” public policy prohibiting the use of exculpatory clauses to avoid claims of strict products liability despite the fact that no Florida court had ever determined such a policy existed. Relying upon federal and non-Florida precedent, the Court …

Arbitration Mediation
Is Your Arbitration Clause “Broad” or “Narrow”? And Do You Understand Buckeye v. Cardegna? (BREA 3-2 LLC v. Hagshama)

Most clients include arbitration clauses in their contracts with the intent that any and all disputes between the parties should be resolved by arbitration. Lawyers, however, don’t always write the contract that way… even though the rules have been crystalized for about a decade. Here’s the first test whether your …