Guice v. Enfinger, TT-125
| Decision Date | 07 October 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. TT-125,TT-125 |
| Citation | 389 So.2d 270 |
| Parties | Kathryn W. GUICE, as Personal Representative of the Estate of John Michael Guice, Deceased, Appellant, v. Harvell ENFINGER, Sheriff of Santa Rosa County, Florida, and Northeastern FireInsurance Company of Pennsylvania, an insurance corporation, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Roderic G. Magie of Levin, Warfield, Middlebrooks, Mabie, Rosenbloum & Magie, Pensacola, for appellant.
Julius F. Parker, Jr., of Madigan, Parker, Gatlin, Swedmark & Skelding, Tallahassee, for appellees.
Appellant appeals from a final summary judgment entered by the trial court in favor of appellees. Appellant filed this suit against appellees, the Sheriff of Santa Rosa County and his insurer, for the wrongful death of her husband who hung himself with his belt while incarcerated in the county jail. Appellant contends that the Sheriff's employees were negligent in failing to remove the deceased's belt from him when he was admitted to jail in an intoxicated condition and that the deceased's death was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of that negligence. We disagree.
On the night of March 29, 1977, deceased was arrested by officers of the Gulf Breeze Police Department and charged with driving while intoxicated and possession of a small amount of marijuana. He was taken to the Santa Rosa County Jail where he was allowed to make a phone call. The jailer testified that because he was aware of the deceased's intoxicated condition, he placed him in the sickbay, which is next to the jail office. He testified that he put the deceased to bed without removing any of his articles of clothing; that he checked on him several times during the night, the last check being made at 4:00 a. m.; that he found him sleeping on the bed each time. Around 7:00 a. m., another jail employee found that the deceased had hung himself with his belt.
The Superintendent of the Escambia County Jail testified that the Escambia County Sheriff's Department required the routine removal of all belts from all prisoners brought in for incarceration, whether or not they were drunk, for the specific purpose of preventing prisoners from hanging themselves. An officer of the Florida Highway Patrol with 22 years experience testified that upon arrest by the Highway Patrol, individuals charged with driving while intoxicated are relieved of their belts and any other items of clothing which can be used to injure themselves after being booked at a correctional facility. The Chief Deputy Sheriff at the Santa Rosa County Jail testified that there was no policy of the Santa Rosa County Sheriff's Department to take belts from prisoners when they were booked, except in cases of prisoners who exhibit a suicidal tendency. There are no facts in the record to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clemets v. Heston
...cases, while acknowledging the general rule, have nevertheless found that the custodial officers were not liable. See Guice v. Enfinger (Fla.App.1980), 389 So.2d 270; Pretty on Top v. Hardin (1979), 182 Mont. 311, 597 P.2d 58; Delasky v. Hinsdale (1982), 109 Ill.App.3d 976, 65 Ill.Dec. 454,......
-
Cook ex rel. Tessier v. Sheriff of Monroe County
...connection between the conduct of the corrections officer and any injury sustained by the inmate. See, e.g., Guice v. Enfinger, 389 So.2d 270, 271 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1980). However, causation is not defeated, and the officer is not relieved of liability, if the intervening cause "was foreseea......
-
White v. Whiddon
...(Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (summary judgment reversed where jail inmate attempted suicide and brain damage resulted); see also Guice v. Enfinger, 389 So.2d 270 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Appellee also contends summary judgment should be affirmed based on the patent defect or "Slavin" doctrine. See Slavin......
-
Cockrum v. State
...reasonably foreseeable self-destructive acts. Kanayurak v. North Slope Borough, 677 P.2d 893, 897 (Alaska 1984); Guice v. Enfinger, 389 So.2d 270, 271 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1980); Brandvain v. Ridgeview Inst., 188 Ga.App. 106, 372 S.E.2d 265, 273 (1988); Figueroa v. State, 61 Haw. 369, 604 P.2d ......