Cline v. Flagler Sales Corp.
| Decision Date | 05 March 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 67--434,67--434 |
| Parties | Cora Lee CLINE, Appellant, v. FLAGLER SALES CORP. and O. H. Schwartz, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Howard A. Rose, for appellant.
Ruden, Barnett & McClosky and Henry M. Schmerer, Ft. Lauderdale, for appellees.
Before CHARLES CARROLL, C.J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.
By this appeal the appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, seeks review of an adverse summary final judgment. In determining the correctness of the trial court's ruling, all reasonable inferences from the record are to be taken in the light most favorable to the party moved against in the summary judgment proceedings. Harper v. Mangel, Fla.App.1963, 151 So.2d 346; Cahill v. Cooney, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 32. Viewing the record in light of this principle, it reveals the following:
The plaintiff purchased a chattel from the defendant, Flagler Sales Corp., and executed a retain title sales contract calling for monthly installment payments. The plaintiff fell behind in her installments and the Flagler Sales Corp. employed the defendant, O. H. Schwartz, to obtain collection of the amounts due on the contract. The plaintiff was contacted in reference to the arrearages and she tendered the return of the chattel. But, notwithstanding the offer to return, Schwartz caused criminal proceedings to be instituted against her alleging violation of § 818.01, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., which resulted in her being arrested at 3:00 o'clock A.M. by a deputy constable who was accompanied by the defendant Schwartz. She was detained by the constable until approximately 9:30 o'clock A.M., when she was delivered by the deputy constable to Schwartz for the purpose of transporting her to the place of employment of her mother in order that she might secure funds to deliver to Schwartz, who refused to release her until he received certain money. Thereafter, the matter came on for hearing before a justice of the peace in a preliminary hearing, which again resulted in the plaintiff (defendant in those proceedings) offering to return the chattel, which was accepted by Schwartz and the plaintiff (defendant therein) was not bound over for further criminal proceedings. 1 Thereafter, the instant action was filed at law in three counts alleging malicious prosecution, false imprisonment, and abuse of process. After issue being joined by answers which raised certain affirmative defenses, the trial court entertained motions for summary judgment and entered the summary final judgment here under review in favor of the defendant.
As to the count relating to the malicious prosecution, we affirm the action of the trial court because the record before him clearly indicated that the proceeding instituted in the justice of the peace court did not terminate in her favor, as is necessary to support a malicious prosecution action. Warriner v. Burdines, Inc., Fla.1957, 93 So.2d 108; Gallucci v. Milavic, Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 375, 68 A.L.R.2d 1164; Williams v. Confidential Credit Corporation, Fla.App.1959, 114 So.2d 718. It is apparent that the matter was settled before the justice of the peace and such a determination will not support such a charge. Freedman v. Crabro Motors, Inc., Fla.App.1967, 199 So.2d 745.
As to the false imprisonment charge, relating to the detention in Schwartz' automobile, we reverse. It is not necessary that a person actually be incarcerated to have a cause of action for false imprisonment. 14 Fla.Jur., False Imprisonment, § 3; 32 Am.Jur.2d, False Imprisonment, §§ 11, 12. Although the trier of the fact, upon the resolution of the disputed issues of fact, may not sustain the plaintiff's position, the record (indicating that she was refused release from the automobile of the defendant Schwartz until she obtained monies from her mother) was sufficient to withstand an adverse ruling on the motion for summary judgment.
There were triable issues...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dykes v. Hosemann
...attacking the judgment.1 The child was obviously not dependent. See ante p. 944 n. 2.2 See also Cline v. Flagler Sales Corp., 207 So.2d 709, 711 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1968) (per curiam):In an action for abuse of process it is not essential to show a termination of the proceeding in favor of the ......
-
Drill Parts and Service Co., Inc. v. Joy Mfg. Co.
...P.2d 876, 881 (Ariz.App.1982); Gause v. First Bank of Marianna, 457 So.2d 582, 584 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1984); Cline v. Flagler Sales Corp., 207 So.2d 709, 711 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1968); Price v. Fidelity Trust Co., 74 Ga.App. 836, 41 S.E.2d 614, 616 (1947); Davison-Paxon Co. v. Walker, 45 Ga.App.......
-
Paisey v. VITALE, IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLA., 85-6160-Civ.
...based on abuse of process. That theory is directed toward abuse of methods used to procure payment of a debt. Cline v. Flagler Sales Corp., 207 So.2d 709 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968). We decline to stretch Florida law to encompass this claim of Plaintiff's Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that......
-
Burshan v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INS. COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA.
...element of abuse of process. See Della-Donna v. Nova Univ., Inc., 512 So.2d 1051, 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Cline v. Flagler Sales Corp., 207 So.2d 709, 711 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968). V. The trial court properly dismissed the conversion, trespass, and "wrongful act" counts for failure to state a c......
-
Procedural torts
...to the common law elements of abuse of process, this case makes reference to the following two cases: (1) Cline v. Flagler Sales Corp., 207 So.2d 709, 711 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968), and (2) Concord Shopping Center, Inc. v. Litowitz, 183 So.2d 562 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). 5. Cline v. Flagler Sales Corp.......