Schindler Elevator Corp. v. Viera, 93-1227

Decision Date12 October 1994
Docket NumberNo. 93-1227,93-1227
Citation644 So.2d 563
Parties19 Fla. L. Weekly D2161 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Digna VIERA, as personal representative of the Estate of Ismael Viera, deceased, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Heinrich Gordon Batchelder Hargrove & Weihe, and Paula Revene, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Spence, Payne, Masington & Needle, and A. Francisco Areces; Podhurst, Orseck, Josefsberg, Eaton, Meadow, Olin & Perwin, and Joel D. Eaton, Miami, for appellee.

Before BASKIN, JORGENSON and GERSTEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Schindler Elevator Corporation (Schindler), appeals an adverse final judgment in this negligence action brought on behalf of Ismael Viera, the deceased. We reverse and remand for a new trial on liability because the trial court erred in denying Schindler's request to have the jury apportion the respective liability of a settling co-defendant pursuant to Fabre v. Marin, 623 So.2d 1182 (Fla.1993).

The deceased fell to his death in an elevator shaft while attempting to escape from an elevator that was stuck between floors. His wife, appellee Digna Viera (Viera), as personal representative of the estate, sued Dade County as the owner of the elevator, and Schindler as the company responsible for the elevator's maintenance. Viera claimed that Schindler was negligent in failing to properly service the elevator, and further alleged that the county was negligent in failing to follow proper safety precautions. Prior to trial, the county settled with Viera individually for $100,000, and also settled with the estate for $100,000.

At the conclusion of the evidence, Schindler requested that the county be listed on the verdict form for apportioning liability. The trial court denied the request, and the jury only considered the liability of Schindler and the deceased. The jury entered a total award in favor of Viera for $600,000, finding Schindler to be 75% at fault, and the deceased to be 25% at fault. After reducing the award by the percentage of the deceased's comparative negligence, and setting-off the $100,000 settlement which Viera had received from the county, the trial court entered final judgment against Schindler for $350,000.

We agree with Schindler that reversal is required under Fabre v. Marin, 623 So.2d at 1182. The Florida supreme court in Fabre held that section 768.81(3), Florida Statutes (1989), requires that the jury be given the opportunity to apportion liability among all persons responsible for an accident. The supreme court recognized that "the only means of determining a party's...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Nash v. Wells Fargo Guard Services, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • July 3, 1996
    ...Guard Services, Inc. v. Nash, 654 So.2d 155 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995), which directly and expressly conflicts with Schindler Elevator Corp. v. Viera, 644 So.2d 563, 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); American Aerial Lift, Inc. v. Perez, 629 So.2d 169, 172 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), review denied, 659 So.2d 1085 (F......
  • Loureiro v. Pools by Greg, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 30, 1997
    ...To arrive at its ruling in Nash, the supreme court expressly approved three cases from the third district, Schindler Elevator Corp. v. Viera, 644 So.2d 563 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), American Aerial Lift, Inc. v. Perez, 629 So.2d 169 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), review denied, 659 So.2d 1085 (Fla.1995), an......
  • Schindler Elevator Corp. v. Viera, 96-1904
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 21, 1997
    ...wrongful death action which proceeded to trial against Schindler as the elevator maintenance company. Schindler Elevator Corp. v. Viera, 644 So.2d 563, 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (Viera I ). 1 Following the then existing law in this district, the trial court refused Schindler's request to list ......
  • Shufflebarger v. Galloway, s. 93-2841
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • May 17, 1995
    ...from the parties on the question of whether there was a conflict between this court's decisions of Ashraf and Schindler Elevator Corp. v. Viera, 644 So.2d 563 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). See Fla.R.App.P. 9.331(d)(3). The area of conflict concerned whether on remand there should be a complete retria......

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