Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Gibson

Citation566 S.W.2d 154
Parties24 UCC Rep.Serv. 1038 FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY, Appellant, v. Jesse L. GIBSON, Appellee.
Decision Date04 March 1977
CourtCourt of Appeals of Kentucky

Frank G. Dickey, Jr., Landrum, Patterson & Dickey, Lexington, for appellant.

Larry D. Raikes, Hodgenville, for appellee.

Before WHITE, HOGGE and LESTER, JJ.

WHITE, Judge:

This appeal is from a judgment for appellee in the amount of $1,000.00 compensatory damages and $1,000.00 punitive damages on a claim of false imprisonment. Appellee was also awarded $450.00 on his claim of breach of contract on the theory that he had been damaged in that amount by appellant's failure to give him notice of its termination of a secured interest in appellee's car. The appellant had moved for a directed verdict and judgment n.o.v., both of which were denied. The appellant appeals on both issues, viz: the alleged false imprisonment and the contract claim.

Our consideration of the false imprisonment claim is confined to whether or not there was sufficient evidence to submit this issue to the jury; and, it is obligatory for us to examine the testimony in the light most favorable to the appellee. The facts are as follows:

In the summer and fall of 1972, a dispute arose between appellee Gibson and Ford Motor Credit Company, hereinafter FMCC, over the amount of the monthly payment that Gibson was to make on a car he had recently purchased. In order to encourage Gibson to pay the amount FMCC was demanding, several visits were made by FMCC agents to see him.

On January 17, 1973, Richard Kesselring went to Gibson's home, located 12 miles from Hodgenville, Kentucky, in an attempt to persuade Gibson to turn over the automobile or make his payments current. Gibson informed him that the matter was being handled by his attorney in Hodgenville and agreed to go with Kesselring to see the attorney. Upon their arrival at Hodgenville, they discovered that Gibson's attorney was not at home. Kesselring then called his superior from a public phone, and the superior asked to talk to Gibson. During this phone conversation, Kesselring's superior told Gibson that unless Gibson either signed certain papers or turned over the keys to his car, Gibson would have to walk home. This same threat was repeated by Kesselring in a rough voice, but no physical force or threat of force was involved in either instance. Kesselring then relented and returned Gibson to his home.

The case law in this jurisdiction defines false imprisonment as being any deprivation of the liberty of one person by another or detention for however short a time without such person's consent and against his will, whether done by actual violence, threats or otherwise. Grayson Variety Store, Inc. v. Shaffer, Ky., 402 S.W.2d 424 (1966); Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Billups, 253 Ky. 126, 69 S.W.2d 5 (1934).

In order to constitute a case of false imprisonment, it is essential that there be some direct restraint present. Restraint constituting a false imprisonment may arise out of words, acts, gestures, or the like, which induce a reasonable apprehension that force will be used if the plaintiff does not submit. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Billups, supra.

On the other hand, "submission to the mere verbal direction of another unaccompanied by force, or threats of any character, does not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
12 cases
  • Sanders v. City of Pembroke
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Kentucky
    • August 6, 2020
    ...Inc. v. Shaffer, 402 S.W.2d 424 (Ky. 1960); Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co. v. Billups, 69 S.W.2d 5 (Ky. 1934); Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Gibson, 566 S.W.2d 154 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977); J.J. Newberry Co. v. Judd, 82 S.W.2d 359 (Ky. 1935); Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co. v. Mason, 251 S.W. 184 (Ky. 192......
  • Kelly v. West Cash & Carry Bldg. Materials
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Louisiana (US)
    • October 20, 1999
    ...insufficient to effect an imprisonment if the person to whom they are spoken is not deprived of freedom of action. Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Gibson, 566 S.W.2d 154 (Ky.1977); Grayson Variety Store, Inc. v. Shaffer, 402 S.W.2d 424 In Dominguez v. Globe Discount City, Inc., 470 S.W.2d 919 (Tex......
  • Hernandez v. Theriot
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Louisiana
    • August 1, 2016
    ...to effect an imprisonment if the person to whom they are spoken is not deprived of freedom of action. Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Gibson, 566 S.W.2d 154 (Ky.1977); Grayson Variety Store, Inc. v. Shaffer, 402 S.W.2d 424 (Ky.1966).39 The seizure of a person, as described in United States v. Mend......
  • McDonald's Corporation v. Ogborn, No. 2008-CA-000024-MR (Ky. App. 11/20/2009), 2008-CA-000024-MR.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Kentucky
    • November 20, 2009
    ...to effect an imprisonment if the person to whom they are spoken is not deprived of freedom of action. Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Gibson, 566 S.W.2d 154, 155-56 (Ky.App. 1977) (citation and internal quotation marks We focus on two things: the behavior of the alleged perpetrator and the reasona......
  • 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