Warren ex rel. Brassell v. K Mart Corp.
Citation | 765 So.2d 235 |
Decision Date | 01 August 2000 |
Docket Number | No. 1D99-3521.,1D99-3521. |
Parties | Joseph WARREN, a minor, by and through his mother and next friend, Cheryl BRASSELL, Appellant, v. K MART CORPORATION, a Michigan Corporation, Appellee. |
Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Jay C. Floyd of Law Office of Hardee & Floyd, Jacksonville, for Appellant.
Gary A. Bubb, Jacksonville, for Appellee.
Joseph Warren (Warren) appeals the dismissal of his complaint against K Mart Corporation (K Mart), with prejudice, for failure to state a cause of action. We affirm.
Warren, on August 9, 1998, purchased carbon dioxide (CO2) cartridges from K Mart, in Duval County. That same day, Warren was blinded in his right eye when a companion fired, from a pellet gun, a pellet propelled by one of the CO2 cartridges purchased from K Mart. Warren's single count complaint sued K Mart on the theory of negligent entrustment, based on his status as an unaccompanied minor1 at the time of purchase of the CO2 cartridges.
Warren argues that the trial judge erred in dismissing his complaint. We know that:
When ruling on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, the trial court must accept the allegations of a complaint as true. Likewise, the appellate court must accept the facts alleged in a complaint as true when reviewing an order that determines the sufficiency of the complaint. Whether a complaint is sufficient to state a cause of action is an issue of law. Consequently, a ruling on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action is reviewable on appeal by the de novo standard of review.
Sarkis v. Pafford Oil Co., 697 So.2d 524, 526 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (citations omitted) (emphasis added).
The trial judge in the instant case as a matter of law correctly dismissed the complaint. Warren cites no statute or case law making the sale of CO2 cartridges to a minor unlawful or an act of negligence. He instead argues that the sale of CO2 cartridges to minors may have violated the K Mart's internal policy. The standard of care however is set by the community, rather than by a corporation's internal policy. Metropolitan Dade County v. Zapata, 601 So.2d 239, 244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) () .
Warren nevertheless relies on Kitchen v. K-Mart Corp., 697 So.2d 1200 (Fla.1997) ( ). Kitchen is inapposite: no firearm was sold in the instant case; no knowledge of intoxication or other special circumstances is alleged.
Warren also relies on McCain v. Florida Power Corp., 593 So.2d 500 (Fla.1992) ( ). McCain too is inapposite: no improperly marked underground high-voltage cable is involved here; no failure to warn of danger is alleged.
Warren argues that a CO2 cartridge should be treated like a gun or a car, instrumentalities declared dangerous in various cases. No known American case however holds that a CO2 cartridge is a dangerous instrumentality, so as to impose tort liability. Courts, on the contrary, have held otherwise. See, e.g., Holmes v. J.C. Penney Co., 133 Cal.App.3d 216, 219, 220, 183 Cal.Rptr. 777 (1982)
(...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Tillman v. C.R. Bard, Inc.
...So.3d at 997 ; Kohler Co. v. Marcotte, 907 So.2d 596, 598–99 (Fla. 3d Dist.Ct.App.2005) ; see also Warren ex rel. Brassell v. K Mart Corp., 765 So.2d 235, 237 (Fla. 1st Dist.Ct.App.2000) (referencing favorably § 2 of the Third Restatement but not addressing the issue). Although the Fourth D......
-
Veliz v. Rental Service Corp. Usa, Inc.
...obvious or generally known, the prospective addressee of a warning will or should already know of its existence." Warren v. K Mart Corp., 765 So.2d 235, 238 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Thus, "[w]arning of an obvious or generally known risk in most instances will not provide an effective additional......
-
In re Fosamax Products Liab. Litigationthis Document Relates To:shirley Boles v. Merck & Co. Inc. Case No. 1:06–cv–09455–jfk
...to other sections of the Restatement (Third) regarding issues of product liability. See, e.g., Warren ex rel. Brassell v. K–Mart Corp., 765 So.2d 235, 237 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2000) (citing § 2); Kohler Co. v. Marcotte, 907 So.2d 596, 598–99 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2005) (citing §§ 2 and 5); Burch v. ......
-
Oken v. Monsanto Co.
...a negligence cause of action. See McCorvey v. Baxter Healthcare Corp., 2002 WL 1669832 (11th Cir. July 24, 2002); Warren v. K-Mart Corp., 765 So.2d 235, 237 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (quoting Restatement (Third) of Torts that "a product contains a manufacturing defect when the product departs fro......
-
The Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability - the tension between product design and product warnings.
...not yet discussed the Third Restatement. At least one Florida appellate decision, however, has relied on it. In Warren v. K-Mart Corp., 765 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), a minor purchased C[O.sub.2] cartridges from K-Mart. He was blinded in his right eye when a companion fired from a pell......
-
Will Florida subscribe to the component seller doctrine? "The Buck Stops Here" section 5 of the Restatement (Third) of Torts: products liability.
...(23) Additionally, several of Florida's intermediate appellate courts have applied the Third Restatement. (24) In Warren v. K-Mart Corp., 765 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), the court deemed the case before it as one "suggested by the [Third] Restatement, where fairness requires the consume......