Parkansky v. Old Key Largo, Inc., 88-1583
| Decision Date | 25 July 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 88-1583,88-1583 |
| Citation | 546 So.2d 1143,14 Fla. L. Weekly 1752 |
| Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1752 David PARKANSKY, Appellant, v. OLD KEY LARGO, INC. and St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Steven E.M. Hartz, Miami, for appellant.
Kubicki, Bradley, Draper, Gallagher & McGrane and Betsy E. Gallagher and Daniel Draper, Miami, for appellee St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co.
No appearance for Old Key Largo, Inc.
Before HUBBART, FERGUSON and COPE, JJ.
St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company filed an action against its insured, Old Key Largo, Inc., and David Parkansky, seeking a declaratory judgment that Parkansky was a tavern employee of Old Key Largo acting within the scope of employment when injured and thus excluded from coverage under the terms of its general liability policy. The jury returned a verdict for the insurer. We reverse and remand for a new trial.
By a pretrial motion in limine, Parkansky sought an order prohibiting the insurer from inquiring about the seizure and impoundment of his boat by customs agents for suspected drug trafficking. He alleged that the fact of the seizure would be prejudicial to him in the trial of the case if disclosed to the jury and that the probative value of the information, if any, was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. The court reserved ruling on the motion.
Consistent with Parkansky's defense, that his occupation was other than a barroom bouncer, his attorney told the jury, in opening statement:
Mr. Parkansky was a charter boat captain, a fisherman, took people out. You're going to see a picture of his boat. He had a big fifty-foot sport fisherman. At the time of this incident it was in drydock.... That's what he's always done.... Mostly he's been a charter boat captain.
The insurer's strategy was to disprove the other-occupation defense by showing that Parkansky was not working as a charter boat captain at the time of his injury. To immediately make the point at trial, the insurer called Parkansky as an adverse witness and asked him whether he had been out on the boat during the seven months preceding the incident. Parkansky answered that he had not and explained that his boat was in the boatyard. St. Paul's counsel then inquired further, and Parkansky answered:
Q. It [the boat] was in the boatyard, was it not sir, as a result of being impounded by customs?
A. Not at that time, no.
Parkansky's objection was sustained and, without a request, the court instructed the jury to disregard the question. Although the trial judge agreed that the question was prejudicial, and that it had no probative value, he denied Parkansky's motion for a mistrial--apparently of the view that the error was harmless. The jury returned a verdict for the insurer finding that Parkansky was an Old Key Largo employee not covered by St. Paul's policy.
Parkansky's contention on appeal is that counsel's remark concerning the boat seizure by custom's agents was irrelevant, and was intended to, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Domino's Pizza, LLC v. Wiederhold
...such an instruction was sufficient to do so is decided according to the facts, on a case-by-case basis."); Parkansky v. Old Key Largo, Inc., 546 So.2d 1143, 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) ("A new trial is warranted when an improper comment is likely to result in substantial prejudice to the compla......
-
Dolphin Cruise Line v. Stassinopoulos, No. 97-1542
...1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Morowitz v. Vistaview Apartments, Ltd., 613 So.2d 493, 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Parkansky v. Old Key Largo, Inc., 546 So.2d 1143, 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Turning now to the cross appeal, Stassinopoulos urges that the trial court's denial of his motion for additur o......
-
Al-Site Corp. v. Della Croce, AL-SITE
...Kaas v. Atlas Chem. Co., 623 So.2d 525 (Fla.3d DCA 1993); George v. Mann, 622 So.2d 151 (Fla.3d DCA 1993); Parkansky v. Old Key Largo, Inc., 546 So.2d 1143 (Fla.3d DCA 1989); Borden, Inc. v. Young, 479 So.2d 850 (Fla.3d DCA 1985); Simmons v. Baptist Hosp. of Miami, Inc., 454 So.2d 681 (Fla.......
-
Edwards v. Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc., 97-2159
...as it did not tend to prove depression and was a highly prejudicial characterization of Edwards. See Parkansky v. Old Key Largo, Inc., 546 So.2d 1143, 1144-45 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Furthermore, the insinuation that was made during the cross-examination by Edwards' psychiatric expert that Edwa......