Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Equipment Co. v. Charles Poe Masonry, Inc., s. 77-548
| Decision Date | 25 April 1978 |
| Docket Number | 77-549,Nos. 77-548,s. 77-548 |
| Citation | 358 So.2d 84 |
| Parties | SPRING LOCK SCAFFOLDING RENTAL EQUIPMENT COMPANY and United National Insurance Company, Appellants, v. CHARLES POE MASONRY, INC., et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Virgin, Whittle & Popper and Gary E. Garbis, Podhurst, Orseck & Parks and Joel D. Eaton, Miami, for appellants.
High, Stack, Davis & Lazenby and Alan R. Dakan, Horton, Perse & Ginsberg, P. J. Carroll & Associates, Miami, for appellees.
Before HENDRY and HUBBART, JJ., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.) Associate Judge.
The defendants, Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Equipment Company (Spring Lock) and its insurer, United National Insurance Company, appeal from a summary judgment entered in favor of the appellees as the defendants to a third-party complaint filed against them by the defendant, Spring Lock.
One Arthur Lott was injured when he fell from a scaffold on a construction job. Joined by his wife, he filed action for damages for personal injuries against Spring Lock and its insurer. The right of Lott to so proceed notwithstanding his entitlement to workmen's compensation benefits was established by this court on an earlier appeal in this case (311 So.2d 759).
The scaffold, manufactured by Spring Lock, was leased by Spring Lock to Charles Poe Masonry, Inc. (Poe) which assembled and used it, as a sub-contractor on a construction project on which Miller & Solomon Construction Co. was the general contractor. Lott was an employee of the general contractor. Emil J. Gould and Estelle Gould were the property owners.
In Lott's action against the manufacturer, Spring Lock, recovery was sought on three grounds: negligence, breach of implied warranty and strict liability.
Spring Lock filed a third-party complaint for indemnity against its lessee, Poe (claiming indemnity by contract and by common law) and against the general contractor and the property owners (claiming common law indemnity). Lott and Spring Lock entered into a Mary Carter agreement, fixing a $300,000.00 liability limit. See: Booth v. Mary Carter Co., 202 So.2d 8 (Fla.2d DCA 1967); Maule Industries v. Rountree, 284 So.2d 389 (Fla.1973).
On motion of the third-party defendants, the court granted them summary judgment. Alternatively the court held that if Spring Lock ultimately should be held to be entitled to indemnity, its recovery would be limited to the Mary Carter agreement liability limit. Spring Lock appealed. (The summary judgment in favor of the land owners is not involved on this appeal.).
The trial court correctly held Spring Lock was not entitled to common law indemnity against the third-party defendants. If Spring Lock was guilty of negligence in the manufacture of the scaffold, as charged by plaintiff, its liability therefor was for its active negligence, precluding it from indemnity. Stuart v. Hertz Corporation, 351 So.2d 703 (Fla.1977). The same applies if liability should be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Houdaille Industries, Inc. v. Edwards
...1st DCA 1978), which conflicts with Stuart v. Hertz Corporation, 351 So.2d 703 (Fla.1977), and Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Co. v. Charles Poe Masonry, Inc., 358 So.2d 84 (Fla.3d DCA 1978), 1 thereby vesting jurisdiction in this Court pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3), Florida Consti......
-
F & R Builders v. Lowell Dunn Co., 77-2467
...& Rubber Company v. Thompson Aircraft Tire Corporation, 353 So.2d 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Equipment Company v. Charles Poe Masonry, Inc., 358 So.2d 84 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). Absent such a showing, Dunn could not be held negligent in any way, so as to permit indem......
-
Charles Poe Masonry, Inc. v. Spring Lock Scaffolding Rental Equipment Co.
...us on petition and cross-petition for writ of certiorari to review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, reported at 358 So.2d 84, which allegedly misapplied Leonard L. Farber Co. v. Jaksch, 335 So.2d 847 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). The issue is whether respondent and cross-p......
-
City of Jacksonville v. Franco, s. EE-488
...if any there be. The parties have so contracted. The contract is to be abided by. See also Springs Lock Scaffolding, etc. v. Chas. Poe Masonry, Inc., 358 So.2d 84 (Fla.3d DCA 1978). The final judgment for partial indemnity entered for Seaboard is hereby REVERSED with directions to enter an ......