School Bd. of Palm Beach County v. Anderson, 80-541
| Decision Date | 24 March 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 80-541,80-541 |
| Citation | 411 So.2d 940 |
| Parties | 3 Ed. Law Rep. 797 The SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, Appellant, v. William J. ANDERSON, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Clifford I. Hertz, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Richard A. Henry of Sims & Henry, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a final judgment entered in conformance with a jury verdict in a wrongful death action brought by appellee, the deceased's father. Appellee sought recovery for appellant's negligence in failing to protect the deceased on its premises from criminal attack by a third person. At the conclusion of appellee's case in chief, appellant moved for a directed verdict, alleging the evidence on an essential element of the case was lacking. At the close of all the evidence, appellant renewed its motion. The jury returned a verdict in favor of appellee, and appellant sought to set it aside and have the judgment entered in its favor in accordance with its motion for a directed verdict. The trial court denied the motions. Finding no error, we affirm.
In May of 1976 two former students of Palm Beach Gardens High School, Brian Anderson, a white, and Gregory Ransom, a black, went to the school during lunchtime. Anderson was in the parking lot talking with a group of his friends when Ransom approached him. An altercation ensued, resulting in Ransom going to the trunk of his car, removing a handgun, and returning to where Anderson and the others were standing. Ransom fired three shots, inducing Anderson to reach in his car for a soda pop bottle. Ransom fired again, fatally wounding Anderson. An off-duty custodian was the only school official on campus at the time of the shooting. Adequate school supervision, according to appellee, could have prevented the occurrence.
At trial appellant made motions for a directed verdict and a post-trial motion in accordance therewith, all of which were denied. Appellant argues the motions should have been granted because there was no evidence that it knew of a dangerous condition or could have known of one by the use of reasonable care.
Undoubtedly, appellant owed to the deceased, who admittedly was an invitee, 1 the duty of keeping the premises in a reasonably safe condition and of guarding against dangerous circumstances of which it was cognizant or might reasonably have foreseen. McNulty v. Hurley, 97 So.2d 185, 187 (Fla.1957). This court's opinion in Relyea v. State, 385 So.2d 1378 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980), represents the current law on a landowner's responsibility to protect an invitee from criminal attack:
As a basic principle of law, a property owner has no duty to protect one on his premises from criminal attack by a third person.... Even though one's negligence may be a cause in fact of another's loss, he will not be liable if an independent, intervening and unforeseeable criminal act also causes the loss.... If, however, the criminal attack is reasonably foreseeable, a duty may arise between a...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pickens v. ITT Educ. Servs., Inc.
...that schools may owe non-student invitees the duty of keeping the premises reasonably safe. See, e.g., Sch. Bd. of Palm Beach County v. Anderson, 411 So. 2d 940 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982) (school had duty to father who was on school grounds to collect student's records and was subsequently ......
-
Ameijeiras v. Metropolitan Dade County
...472 So.2d 1210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), review denied, 484 So.2d 8 (Fla.1986), and 484 So.2d 9 (Fla.1986); School Bd. of Palm Beach County v. Anderson, 411 So.2d 940 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Medina; Relyea. In the case before us, the record discloses that no violent crimes were reported to Dade Cou......
-
Levitz v. Burger King Corp.
...Port Condominium Assoc., Inc. v. Feldman, 426 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 434 So.2d 887 (Fla.1983); School Bd. v. Anderson, 411 So.2d 940 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Medina v. 187th Street Apartments, Ltd., 405 So.2d 485, 486 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); see also Doe v. United States, 718 F.2d......
-
Truog v. Mid-America Apartment Cmtys., Inc.
...a property owner has no duty to protect one on his premises from criminal attack by a third person." Sch. Bd. of Palm Beach Cty. v. Anderson , 411 So.2d 940, 941 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Yet Florida law recognizes a "special relationship" between landlords and tenants that, in certain circumsta......