Beverly Health and Rehabilitation Services, Inc. v. Freeman, 96-04592

Decision Date20 February 1998
Docket NumberNo. 96-04592,96-04592
Parties23 Fla. L. Weekly D533 BEVERLY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION SERVICES, INC., f/k/a Beverly Enterprises-Florida, Inc., d/b/a Beverly Gulf Coast-Florida, Inc., Appellant, v. Ralph T. FREEMAN, By and Through Ruth G. FREEMAN, Guardian of his Property, and Ruth G. Freeman, individually, Appellees.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Betsy E. Gallagher of Gallagher & Howard, Tampa, and Margaret J. Babb of Proskauer, Rose, Goetz & Mendelsohn, LLP, Washington, DC, for Appellant.

James L. Wilkes, II, and Edward J. Lyons of Wilkes & McHugh, P.A., Tampa, for Appellees.

ALTENBERND, Judge.

Beverly Health and Rehabilitative Services, Inc. (Beverly Health), appeals an order granting a new trial to the plaintiff, Ralph T. Freeman, in an action pursuant to section 400.023, Florida Statutes (1993), for damages allegedly resulting from violations of Mr. Freeman's rights as a nursing home resident. The trial court granted a new trial on the ground that the verdict was inadequate because it awarded no damages. We reverse because the jury resolved this case on a disputed issue of causation and properly followed the trial court's instruction to skip the interrogatory on damages.

In November 1993 Mr. Freeman began residing at Tarpon Health Care Center (THCC), a nursing home that Beverly Health operates. At that time Mr. Freeman was a very ill, eighty-eight-year-old man, who had an extensive history of medical and psychological problems. While residing at THCC, he developed foot ulcers and his leg had to be amputated at the knee. Following this surgery, he was placed in another nursing home in October 1994.

Mr. Freeman filed this civil enforcement action, alleging that he had sustained "actual" damages as a result of various violations of his nursing home residents' rights. § 400.023(1), Fla. Stat. (1993). Those rights, enumerated in section 400.022, Florida Statutes (1993), are extensive and diverse. For example, the statute provides that a resident has a right "to be treated courteously, fairly, and with the fullest measure of dignity." § 400.022(1)(n), Fla. Stat. (1993). One of the issues presented to the jury in Mr. Freeman's case was whether Beverly Health violated the above right and whether that violation caused Mr. Freeman damage.

The primary focus of this trial concerned Mr. Freeman's amputated leg. The plaintiff argued that this amputation was caused by a violation of Mr. Freeman's rights as a resident. Beverly Health argued that it may have committed a few isolated technical violations of the statutes, but that it caused Mr. Freeman no actual damage. Beverly Health maintained that the leg needed to be amputated for proper medical reasons unrelated to its treatment of Mr. Freeman.

The trial court gave the jury a verdict form that asked four questions:

1. Were the nursing home resident rights of Ralph T. Freeman deprived or infringed upon by the Defendant, Beverly Health and Rehabilitation Services Corporation?

If your answer to question 1 is YES, please answer question 2. If your answer to question 1 is NO, skip all remaining questions, go to the last page of this verdict form, date and sign the form.

2. Were the deprivations or infringements of Mr. Freeman's resident rights a legal cause of the loss, injury, or damage to Ralph T. Freeman?

If your answer to question 2 is YES, please answer question 3. If your answer to question 2 is NO, skip question 3, and go to question 4.

3. What is the total amount of compensatory damages Ralph T. Freeman suffered during his life as a result of the deprivations or infringements upon his nursing home resident rights?

Go to question 4.

4. Was there conduct on the part of Defendant Beverly which warrants an award of punitive damages?

The jury answered the first question "yes." It answered the second question "no." Following the instructions, the jury skipped question 3, and then answered the punitive damages question "no."

Prior to publishing the verdict, the trial judge held a bench conference and tentatively expressed his view that the verdict was "inconsistent." Mr. Freeman's counsel agreed, and argued that because the jury found Beverly Health had deprived Mr. Freeman of his statutory rights, it had to at least award nominal damages. Mr. Freeman's counsel, however, did not request the trial court to reinstruct and return the jury for further deliberations. Counsel for Beverly Health explained that the verdict was consistent because the jury could have found that Beverly Health's violation of Mr. Freeman's rights was not the legal cause of any actual or punitive damages. See § 400.23(1), Fla. Stat. (1993). After publishing the verdict, the trial court polled the jury twice to ascertain whether this was their intended verdict. The trial judge specifically asked the jury the second time, "Your intent was that there was an infringement, but that there were no damages?" All jurors agreed with the trial judge's statement of their intent.

Mr. Freeman filed a motion for new trial in which he argued that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Hernandez v. Gonzalez
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 30, 2013
    ...cannot be faulted for doing exactly what it was instructed to do.” Plana, 990 So.2d at 557;see also Beverly Health & Rehab. Servs., Inc. v. Freeman, 709 So.2d 549, 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (plaintiff “waived the issue of nominal damages by agreeing to the verdict form that instructed the jury......
  • Plana v. Sainz
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 18, 2008
    ...plaintiffs are precluded from asserting that the zero damage award entered by the jury was error. See Beverly Health & Rehab. Servs., Inc. v. Freeman, 709 So.2d 549, 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (holding that the plaintiff "waived the issue of nominal damages by agreeing to the verdict form that ......
  • Baker v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 18, 2015
    ...what it was instructed to do.” See Plana v. Sainz, 990 So.2d 554, 557 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) ; see also Beverly Health & Rehab. Servs., Inc. v. Freeman, 709 So.2d 549, 551 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (holding that plaintiff waived error by agreeing to the verdict form); Papcun v. Piggy Bag Disc. Souveni......
  • W. Palm Beach Acquisitions, Inc. v. KIA Motors Am.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida
    • April 25, 2022
    ... ... 2008); ... see also Beverly Health & Rehab. Servs., Inc. v ... Freeman ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT