RAE KAUFMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
A-1 BUS LINES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Mrs. Kaufman sued A-1 Bus Lines for injuries sustained when she fell from a catwalk during a museum tour. The trial court entered a directed verdict in favor of A-1 Bus Lines, but the appellate court reversed, holding that whether A-1 assumed a duty as a tour guide was a jury question and that the trial court erred in refusing to allow amendment of the complaint to add A-1 Tours as a defendant.
The court held that whether A-1 Bus Lines assumed a duty commensurate with acting as a tour guide presents a jury question, and that if A-1 served in a capacity beyond furnishing transportation and acted as a tour guide, liability for negligence may result. The court also held that the trial court erred in refusing to permit amendment to add A-1 Tours as a defendant since its presence was proper to a complete determination of the cause.
[1] A jury question is presented as to whether a bus company assumed a duty commensurate with its undertaking to act as a tour guide, which could lead to liability for neglig…
[2] A motion for directed verdict should not be granted if there is any evidence upon which a jury could lawfully find a verdict for the plaintiff.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“whether A-l Bus Lines assumed a duty commensurate with its undertaking to act as tour guide presents a jury question. If the jury finds that A-l served in a capacity beyond that of furnishing transportation and acted as a tour guide, liability for negligence may result.”
Establishes that the duty question is for the jury, not the trial court on directed verdict
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMrs. Kaufman fell from a catwalk while part of a tour group visiting Tom Gaskins' Cypress Knee Museum. She sued A-1 Bus Lines, Tom Gaskins, Lykes Brot…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Amendment Of Pleadings cases and more on FLexlaw
BASKIN, Judge.
Appellant Rae Kaufman challenges an adverse judgment entered following a directed verdict. In her lawsuit, she sought damages for injuries she sustained when she fell from a catwalk while part of a tour group visiting Tom Gaskins’ Cypress Knee Museum. Mrs. Kaufman filed a lawsuit against Tom Gaskins (the operator of the museum), A-l Bus Lines, Lykes Brothers, Inc. (the owner of the museum), and the insurance carrier for Lykes. It was dismissed for failure to state a cause of action. We affirmed the dismissal in Kaufman v. A-1 Bus Lines, Inc., 363 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), but ruled that dismissal should not have been with prejudice. In that decision, we held that under the allegations of the complaint A-1 Bus Lines had no duty to inspect or to warn Mrs. Kaufman of a dangerous condition.
On remand, Mrs. Kaufman amended her complaint and alleged that A-l Bus Lines operated the tour as well as the bus line, made the arrangements, and had actual knowledge of the danger. Subsequently, Mrs. Kaufman sought to add A-l Tours, alleged to be an alter ego of A-l Bus Lines, as a party, but her motion was denied. After hearing a proffer of evidence concerning whether the bus driver served as a tour guide, the court directed a verdict in favor of A-l Bus Lines. This appeal ensued.
We find error in the trial court’s rulings. First, whether A-l Bus Lines assumed a duty commensurate with its undertaking to act as tour guide presents a jury question. If the jury finds that A-l served in a capacity beyond that of furnishing transportation and acted as a tour guide, liability for negligence may result. An action undertaken for the benefit of another must be performed in accordance with a duty to exercise due care. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. L.F.E. Corp., 382 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); accord Padgett v. School Board of Escambia County, 395 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); see Banfield v. Addington, 104 Fla. 661, 140 So. 893 (1932); Restatement, Torts 2d §§ 323, 324A (1965).
A motion for directed verdict should not be granted unless there is no evidence upon which the jury could lawfully find a verdict for the plaintiff. Myers v. Atlantic Coast R.R., 112 So. 2d 263 (Fla.1959); Hernandez v. Motrico, Inc., 370 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Jones v. City of Hialeah, 368 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Balart v. Michel’s Kartway, Inc., 364 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.480. Sufficient evidence appears in the record and in the proffer to require submission to the jury.
Next, we find error in the court’s refusal to permit appellant to amend her complaint. The presence of A-l Tours was proper to a complete determination of the cause. Garner v. Ward, 251 So. 2d 252 (Fla.1971); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.210(a); see Jefferson Realty of Fort Lauderdale, Inc. v. United States Rubber Co., 222 So. 2d 738 (Fla.1969); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.190(a), (e), 1.250(c).
For these reasons, we reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Barfield v. Langley, 432 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…sonable care. See, e.g., Banfield v. Adington, 104 Fla. 661, 140 So. 893 (1932); Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. L.F.E. Corp. and J.E. Greiner Engineering Services, Inc., 382 So. 2d 363, 367 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Kaufman v. A-1 Bus Lines, Inc., 416 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Padgett v. School Board of Escambia County, 395 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). See generally, Fla. Jur. Negligence, § 13; Restatement Torts 2d, §§ 323, 324A (1965). The evidence shows here that Charlotte agreed to take care of J…
-
Clark v. Lumbermans Mut. Ins. Co. & Orange Park Assembly of God, 465 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…s school officials). Appellant also maintains that the church assumed a duty of due care by voluntarily acting as a “tour guide” in organizing and conducting the canoeing trip upon which appellant was injured, citing Kaufman v. A-1 Bus Lines, Inc., 416 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (Kaufman II). There, the plaintiff was injured when she fell off a catwalk while touring a museum visited by tour groups sponsored by- the defendant. The Third District had previously affirmed the Kaufman trial court’s dismissal o…
-
Priester v. Grand Aerie OF THE Fraternal Order OF Eagles, Inc., 688 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…re); Grace v. City of Miami, 661 So. 2d 1232, 1233 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (where city “undertakes to provide a lunch program for children at a city-owned park, it assumes the duty to operate the program safely”); see also Kaufman v. A-l Bus Lines, Inc., 416 So. 2d 863, 864 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (“An action undertaken for the benefit of another must be performed in accordance with a duty to exercise due care.”) (citations omitted). We do not believe that appellees can escape a duty of care if a reasonable inquiry int…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Banfield v. Addison S. Addington and Daisy T. Addington, 104 Fla. 661 (Fla. 1932)
- Garner v. Ward, 251 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 1971)
- Hernandez v. Motrico, Inc., 370 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Myers v. Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co., 112 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1959)
- Padgett v. The Sch. Bd. OF Escambia Cnty., 395 So. 2d 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- The Fid. & Cas. Co. OF NEW York v. L. F. E. Corp. & J. E. Greiner Eng'g Scis., Inc., 382 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)
- Jones v. City OF Hialeah, 368 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Rae Kaufman v. A-1 BUS Lines, Inc., 363 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Jefferson Realty OF Fort Lauderdale, Inc. v. United States Rubber Co., 222 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 1969)
- Balart v. Michel's Kartway, Inc., 364 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)