Wille v. Raymond

Decision Date07 May 1986
Docket NumberNo. 85-398,85-398
Citation11 Fla. L. Weekly 1084,487 So.2d 1211
Parties11 Fla. L. Weekly 1084 Richard P. WILLE, as Sheriff of Palm Beach County, Appellant/Cross Appellee, v. Beth J. RAYMOND, Appellee/Cross Appellant, and Steven Paul Raymond, and Andrew John Raymond, his son, Appellees.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

John R. Beranek, Jane Kreusler-Walsh and Larry Klein of Klein & Beranek, P.A., West Palm Beach and McKeown & Gamot, P.A., Palm Beach, for Wille.

Denise V. Powers of Haddad, Josephs & Jack, Coral Gables, for the Raymonds.

GLICKSTEIN, Judge.

This is an appeal of a final judgment, and order denying a new trial, in favor of plaintiff/appellee, and a cross appeal of an award of zero damages in a false imprisonment case. We reverse the main appeal and affirm the cross appeal.

Steven Paul Raymond, and his wife Beth J. Raymond, individually and as parents and next friend and natural guardian of Andrew J. Raymond, their son, sued Palm Beach County and Deputy Sheriff Susan Lange for damages arising from Steven Paul Raymond's false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, assault, battery and interference with the emotional tranquility of both Steven and Andrew Raymond. The complaint was later amended to include Sheriff Richard Wille as a defendant and to make clear that Susan Lange was a deputy sheriff. The complaint as to Palm Beach County was subsequently by stipulation dismissed with prejudice.

Discovery was had and a jury trial was held. The jury found there had been false imprisonment of Mr. Raymond on the part of the sheriff or his deputies, and awarded damages of $80,000 to Mr. Raymond. They found no false imprisonment of Andrew. The plaintiffs unsuccessfully moved for new trial on Andrew's claim of false imprisonment and Mrs. Raymond's claim for loss of consortium. Sheriff Wille also sought new trial on the grounds there was probable cause for the arrest and the verdict was without support and excessive. Wille also filed a motion for judgment in accordance with motion for directed verdict, and a motion to limit the damages in accordance with the statutory limit of section 768.28, Florida Statutes (1983). The pertinent limit at the time the cause of action accrued was $50,000. Wille's motion for new trial and his motion for judgment in accordance with motion for directed verdict were denied. His motion to amend final judgment and limit liability for damages was granted. This appeal followed entry of the amended final judgment.

Deputy Lange, now Susan Julia Szczepanski, testified that she had not at the time of the events central to this suit received any special training in the area of child abuse. 1 On April 1, 1980, she was traveling west on Belvedere Road in West Palm Beach, driving slowly and about to make a right turn, when she heard a lot of screaming and cursing coming from the south side of the street. She heard Steven Raymond say, "God damn, quit your crying." Also in the car was a little boy. She asked Mr. Raymond to put his hands on the wheel so she could see what if anything he had in his hands. Then she asked him to step out of the car and went around to the child's side of the car. Meanwhile a backup officer arrived because she had reported a suspicious vehicle. Later Sergeant Figueroa, her supervisor, also arrived. Deputy Lange was at the scene about ten minutes. Figueroa suggested the deputy take the child to the substation in her car, and have Mr. Raymond follow in his car--which was done. The deputy said Raymond would have been free to go if he had decided not to follow. She said she took Andrew with her for his protection. She had decided in her own mind that Mr. Raymond should be charged with battery, but had not told this to anyone.

Lieutenant Gray arrived at the substation about the same time as Deputy Lange. Deputy Lange conferred with both Sergeant Figueroa and Lieutenant Gray. Lieutenant Gray ordered her to arrest Mr. Raymond, even though a state attorney Deputy Lange had called had advised her to take the child but not to arrest Mr. Raymond. The arrest was for aggravated child abuse.

After Raymond was arrested and given his rights, Deputy Lange questioned him. He never denied hitting his son. Ms. Lange believed Steven Raymond intended to cause serious injury to Andrew--to maliciously hurt him, because the child had blood on him and a mark on his left cheek. She was concerned about Andrew's health and well-being, but no medical assistance was offered him while he was at the substation.

Steven Raymond had told Deputy Lange back on Belvedere Road that he had hit Andrew because he would not stop crying. She made no inquiry as to whether Andrew was any special kind of child or whether he often had nosebleeds.

When Deputy Lange first approached the Raymond car, Andrew was sobbing. He was very little, so she could see only the top of his head. When she observed the child in the car he had a blue and white towel up to his face and there was blood on his arms and hands and on the towel.

When Deputy Lange asked the child what happened he kept repeating his father hit him because he would not quit crying. She finally settled the child down. While in the car with her the child said his father hit him a lot because he was not as smart as his brother.

After his arrest Mr. Raymond told Deputy Lange that Andrew had expected to go to a water slide that day and was upset because he and his father were going on a fishing trip instead. Andrew started crying and wouldn't stop. Mr. Raymond hit him while they were somewhere between the grandmother's house and the place where Deputy Lange encountered the pair at the side of Belvedere Road. In his testimony, Mr. Raymond admitted that he told the child to be quiet lest he get the father into trouble.

The restated issue in the main appeal is whether it was error for the jury to find the defendant guilty of false imprisonment of the father, because there was probable cause to arrest the father. 2 We conclude that it was. Sheriff Wille argues the officer had probable cause for arresting the father; therefore there can have been no false imprisonment. We agree.

Aggravated child abuse is a felony. For a felony, an officer may lawfully arrest a person without a warrant when the officer "reasonably believes that a felony has been or is being committed and reasonably believes the person to be arrested committed or is committing it." Section 901.15(3), Florida Statutes (1979).

To determine whether probable cause existed for arrest, the test is what a reasonable person would have believed had he known all of the facts known by the officer. State v. Outten, 206 So.2d 392 (Fla.1968). It has been indicated also that the specialized training of the officer to review the facts the officer...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • In re Std. Jury Instructions in Civil Cases -- Report No. 09-01
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 4 Marzo 2010
    ...ON USE FOR 407.8 1. Probable cause is a complete defense to an allegation of false imprisonment. See, e.g., Wille v. Raymond, 487 So.2d 1211 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). If other defenses are asserted which may not a complete defense, instruction 407.8 should be re-worded accordingly. 2. Arrest pur......
  • Dunklin v. Lowndes County
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
    • 30 Junio 1995
    ...a question of law, and summary judgment is appropriate. See White v. Pierce County, 797 F.2d 812, 815 (9th Cir.1986); Wille v. Raymond, 487 So.2d 1211, 1214 (Fla.App. 1986). Marx v. Gumbinner, 905 F.2d 1503, 1506 (11th In the recent decision of Rodgers v. Horsley, 39 F.3d 308 (11th Cir.1994......
  • Gomez v. Lozano
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida
    • 13 Marzo 2012
    ...officer's arrest and detention of the plaintiff, probable cause negates a claim for false-imprisonment too. See Wille v. Raymond, 487 So.2d 1211, 1212 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986). Indeed, under Florida law, false arrest and false imprisonment are nearly indistinguishable where, as here, they are......
  • Marx v. Gumbinner
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • 13 Julio 1990
    ...a question of law, and summary judgment is appropriate. See White v. Pierce County, 797 F.2d 812, 815 (9th Cir.1986); Wille v. Raymond, 487 So.2d 1211, 1214 (Fla.App.1986). Marx argues that probable cause did not exist either when defendants took him to the sheriff's department for question......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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