An $11.4 million auto-negligence verdict is in peril after the Fourth District Court of Appeal sent the case back to trial, where jurors will decipher whether a plaintiff cyclist was too drunk to legally blame the driver who knocked him off his bike.

Palm Beach County resident Manuel Garcia was hit from behind by a van owned by MasTec North America Inc., an infrastructure engineering and construction company based in Coral Gables. Garcia's injuries were extensive, according to the opinion, and he later sued Mastec and its former employee Robert Dumas for negligence.

The defendants denied responsibility for the collision, and tests revealed that Garcia had a blood alcohol level of .23.

A blood alcohol concentration of .23 falls within the sixth of eight stages of alcohol impairment outlined by alcohol.org, which says blackouts can begin at that point. Level .02 is the lowest level of intoxication, while .40 and more could result in a coma or sudden death.

The plaintiff denied he was drunk.

But defense experts argued that level of alcohol could have made him dizzy and uncoordinated, and affected his balance, judgment, decision-making, perceptions and reaction time.

The collision happened on a major six-lane road at around 6 a.m., when it was still dark out, according to the opinion.

An investigation revealed the plaintiff didn't have lights on his bike, was wearing nonreflective clothing and had cowboy boots with a heel that would have covered the reflective strips on his bike pedals.

Jurors found the plaintiff 40% at fault. They awarded $7.6 million in damages for past and future medical expenses, and $3.7 million for pain and suffering.

Palm Beach Circuit Judge Lisa Small granted a motion for directed verdict, instructing jurors that Garcia's alcohol consumption didn't cause or contribute to the accident. But she also asked the jury to decide whether the plaintiff was negligent, and if so, to what extent this negligence related to his injuries.

That was a mistake, according to the Fourth DCA, which found that Florida Statute Section 768.36 blocks relief to plaintiffs impaired by alcohol if their drinking is found to mean they're more than 50% at fault for their injuries. That was a decision for the jury to make, according to the appellate ruling.

The Fourth DCA pointed to prior appeals of directed verdicts involving Section 768.36, which established, "only in the rare case when there is simply no factual dispute as to apportionment of negligence does the trial judge have the authority to make a ruling on the issue as a matter of law."

The defendants also argued that the lower court shouldn't have allowed testimony from the plaintiff's accident reconstruction expert, who argued that if Garcia was as impaired as the defense claimed, he would have been "all over the roadway, maybe up on the sidewalk jumping the curbs or something like that, or if it was bad enough he would have been completely incapable of riding the bicycle and laying on the ground next to his bicycle in the road."

The Fourth DCA agreed, finding the testimony was improper under the Daubert evidence standard because the expert hadn't accurately pieced together the accident before and after impact and so didn't have enough evidence to claim the plaintiff wasn't impaired by alcohol.

The defendants and their attorneys, Alina Rodriguez of Bowman and Brooke in Miami, and Brian Equi and Francis Pierce IV of Goldberg Segalla in Orlando, declined to comment on the case.

Plaintiff attorneys Andrew Harris of Burlington & Rockenbach in West Palm Beach, Steven Kuveikis of Steven Kuveikis in Jupiter and John Wilke of the Law Office of John Wilke in Boca Raton did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.

Fourth DCA Judge Cory Ciklin wrote the opinion with Judges Martha Warner and Broward Circuit Judge Raag Singhal, sitting by designation.

The case will go back to trial, where a jury will decide on liability and damages.

Read the court opinion:

More appeals: