Fincher Investigative Agency, Inc. v. Scott, 80-215

Decision Date03 March 1981
Docket NumberNo. 80-215,80-215
Citation394 So.2d 559
PartiesFINCHER INVESTIGATIVE AGENCY, INC., Appellant, v. Leslie SCOTT, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Underwood, Gillis, Karcher, Reinert & Valle and Anthony Reinert, Miami, for appellant.

Greene & Cooper and Joan M. Bolotin, Rosenblatt, Greene & Aronowitz, Miami, for appellee.

Before HUBBART, C. J., and HENDRY, J., and PEARSON, TILLMAN (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PEARSON, TILLMAN, Associate Judge.

The appellant, Fincher Investigative Agency, Inc., was the defendant in a trial which resulted in a jury verdict and judgment for the defendant. Thereafter, the trial judge granted the plaintiff's motion for a new trial upon the ground of improper juror contact. Fincher appeals the order granting the new trial, and urges first that the court erred in granting a new trial and second that the court erred in failing to grant defendant's motions for a directed verdict. 1

The trial judge was clearly correct in ordering a new trial upon the basis of the bailiff's unauthorized communications with the jury. See Ivory v. State, 351 So.2d 26 (Fla.1977); Stevens Markets, Inc. v. Markantonatos, 189 So.2d 624 (Fla.1966); Holzapfel v. State, 120 So.2d 195 (Fla.3d DCA 1960), cert. denied 125 So.2d 877 (Fla.1960). Initially both plaintiff and defendant realized this and each moved for a mistrial upon discovery of the intrusion upon the jury.

A closer question is presented upon Fincher's point claiming error upon the trial court's denial of its motions for directed verdict. In reviewing the evidence to determine if a directed verdict should have been granted, we must review the record in the light most favorable to the party moved against. 2 We must disregard conflicting evidence and preserve for the jury every reasonable conclusion that could be reached from the evidence for the party moved against. The evidence in this case is in conflict on every major point. The record reviewed in the light above stated supports the trial court's action in denying the defendant's motions for a directed verdict.

A brief outline of the evidence for the plaintiff will be sufficient to show the basis for our holding. Scott was employed as a bagboy in a Winn-Dixie grocery store in Miami. Fincher Investigative Agency provided an armed security guard at the store. Scott was shot during a robbery of the store. A week prior to the robbery, a neighborhood "character" called "Granny" told the store manager that she had overheard three black males talking about robbing the store. 3 The guard was informed and told to be on his toes. The guard understood that a part of his function was to act as a deterrent to robbery. Fincher gave the guard, who was on duty when the robbery occurred, no training in the use of the firearm that it gave him or in what to do should a situation such as the robbery arise.

Under the facts stated, it could not be found that the negligence of Fincher was the sole cause of Scott's injury. However, there is no basis for a finding by the court that a jury could not find negligence on Fincher's part and that such negligence contributed to Scott's injury.

In Nicholas v. Miami Burglar Alarm Co., Inc., 339 So.2d 175 (Fla.1976) the Supreme Court held that a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Prudencio v. Gonzales
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • October 7, 1986
    ...deliberations, the trial court, in the exercise of its discretion, may properly order a new trial. See Fincher Investigative Agency, Inc. v. Scott, 394 So.2d 559 (Fla.App.1981); O'Brien v. City of Seattle, 52 Wash.2d 543, 327 P.2d 433 (1958). In this case, the trial court found that the sub......
  • Shaffer v. Wells Fargo Guard Services, a Subsidiary of Burns Intern. Sec. Services, a Subsidiary of Baker Industries, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 1, 1988
    ...235 So.2d 294 (Fla.1970); Wometco Theatres Corp. v. Rath, 123 So.2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960). But see Fincher Investigative Agency, Inc. v. Scott, 394 So.2d 559 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 402 So.2d 609 (Fla.1981); Cooper. Accordingly, I would affirm dismissal of the negligence...
  • Butala v. Automated Petroleum and Energy Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 7, 1995
    ...Kolosky v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., 472 So.2d 891 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985), review denied, 482 So.2d 350 (Fla.1986); Fincher Investigative Agency v. Scott, 394 So.2d 559 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 402 So.2d 609 (Fla.1981). Whether dialing 911 was the only act required by the retailer's specif......
  • Hack v. Estate of Helling
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 22, 2002
    ...Ltd., 657 So.2d 26 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Texaco, Inc. v. Giltak Corp., 492 So.2d 812 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Fincher Investigative Agency, Inc. v. Scott, 394 So.2d 559 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 402 So.2d 609 (Fla.1981); Allen v. Dutton's Estate, 394 So.2d 132 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); rev. denied, ......
  • 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