Davis v. Shiappacossee
| Decision Date | 10 October 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 2931,2931 |
| Citation | 145 So.2d 758 |
| Parties | Reginald Owen DAVIS, Appellant, v. J. B. SHIAPPACOSSEE, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
David C. Holloman of Gibbons, Gibbons, Tucker & Cofer, Tampa, for appellant.
Frank Ragano, Tampa, for appellee.
Reginald Owen Davis seeks reversal of a final judgment entered pursuant to an order dismissing his complaint as insufficient to state a cause of action. Plaintiff sued to recover damages suffered by him as father of Darrell Reginald Davis, age sixteen, who died in the crash of an automobile. It was alleged that the defendant sold alcoholic beverages to several minors, including the plaintiff's son aforesaid, and the sale of the beverages is alleged to have been the proximate cause of the subsequent fatality in the automobile crash. The case appears to be one of first impression in this jurisdiction.
The defendant, according to the complaint, owned a tavern in Tampa known as the Estuary Bar. An employee, one Robert Farmer, took and filled orders from 'drive in' customers who remained in their vehicles. At eight thirty on the evening of January 27, 1960 the minor son of the plaintiff was in the company of two other minors in an automobile. They drove to the defendant's place of business and, remaining in the automobile, purchased one case of beer in cans and one-half pint of whiskey. It was averred that Robert Farmer, the defendant's employee, made no effort to ascertain the ages of the boys but negligently and wantonly, while acting in the scope of his employment, sold the beverages to them.
The three boys then drove to a drive-in theatre where they began to consume the beverages. During the course of the evening they allegedly consumed the one-half pint of whiskey and fourteen cans of beer. The plaintiff's son and one other boy became ill. Recovering somewhat they proceeded to the home of the third boy and left him there. The plaintiff's son then drove the automobile at a speed of about fifty-five miles per hour and while so engaged, at approximately one fifty o'clock on the morning of January 28, 1960, he lost control of the automobile which struck a tree, turned over and came to rest on its wheels. The plaintiff's son received injuries which resulted in his death approximately six hours after the purchase of the beverages. The automobile was owned by the remaining minor who was in the car at the time of the crash.
The plaintiff contends on appeal that the defendant through his employee violated Florida Statutes, § 562.11, F.S.A., 1 and that such offense should be held negligence per se. It is further contended that it reasonably should have been foreseen that the boys would become intoxicated and injure themselves in the operation of the automobile. Through this reasoning it is submitted that the dereliction of the defendant's employee was the proximate cause of the death of plaintiff's son.
The defendant notes arguendo the absence of any allegation that any of the purchased beverages were consumed on his premises or that the boys had been consuming alcoholic beverages at the time the defendant's employee sold them the beer and whiskey. Essentially, however, the defendant urges that the complaint shows on its face that the proximate cause of the fatality was not the sale of the beverages and that the fatal crash of the automobile was not a reasonably foreseeable result.
The single issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in holding that the complaint failed to state a cause of action. We find no error and accordingly affirm. To hold otherwise would sanction a pyramid of inferences. Liability cannot be imposed merely because it is possible to trace a connection between a negligent act and an injury. 23 Fla.Jur., Negligence, § 29. Proximate cause must be predicated on a direct, natural and continuous sequence between the negligent act and the injury so that but for the act the injury would not have occurred. Seaboard Airline R. Co. v. Mullin, 1915, 70 Fla....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Green Cove Springs v. Donaldson
...Tampa Elec. Co. v. Jones, 1939, 138 Fla. 746, 190 So. 26; Sharon v. Luten, 1st D.C.A.Fla.1964, 165 So.2d 806; Davis v. Shiappacossee, 2d D.C.A. Fla.1962, 145 So.2d 758, rev'd, 155 So.2d 365; McWhorter v. Curby, 2d D.C.A.Fla. 1959, 113 So.2d 566; 23 Fla.Jur., Negligence § 29 (1959). See also......
-
Ellis v. N.G.N. of Tampa, Inc.
...and the death of the driver were not reasonably expected or probable results of the sale of the beverages." Davis v. Shiappacossee, 145 So.2d 758, 760 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962), quashed, 155 So.2d 365 (Fla.1963). In our Davis decision, this Court, under those circumstances, rejected this conclusio......
-
Main Street Entertainment, Inc. v. Faircloth
...to 1963, a seller of alcohol was generally not liable to one injured by reason of intoxication of the buyer. See Davis v. Shiappacossee , 145 So. 2d 758, 760 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962), quashed , 155 So. 2d 365 (Fla. 1963). But in 1963, the Florida Supreme Court modified the common law rule barring......