HILLARD HALPRYN, M.D., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
HIGHLAND INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Implied Warranty Of Fitness For A Particular Purpose cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
Dr. Halpryn slipped and fell on a wet, freshly painted concrete driveway at his father-in-law’s home. He sued the manufacturer and the retailer of the paint. Two expert witnesses stated that the surface was dangerously slippery and unsafe when rained upon, but neither they nor anyone else attributed that condition to the paint, as opposed to the concrete to which it was applied; indeed, it was not shown even whether it had rendered the driveway more or less slippery than it was before. Thus, there was no evidence that a “defect” in the paint was a cause of the injury, as is required to sustain an action on theories of strict liability. West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., Inc., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla.1976). Moreover, there was no testimony that the seller had been asked to supply a paint which would render an outside surface skid-proof or rain-resistant so as to justify a claim that an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose had arisen. Cf., Smith v. Burdines, Inc., 144 Fla. 500, 198 So. 223 (1940). Hence, we approve the trial court’s action in directing a verdict for both defendants at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
R.A. Jones & Sons, Inc. v. Holman, 470 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…ended use of the Ford engine in conjunction with its pump, or whether, as Jones contends, Jones was persuaded by the assurances of H & M with respect to the reliability of the information published by Ford. Compare Halpryn v. Highland Insurance Co., 426 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Accordingly, we reverse the directed verdict entered in favor of H & M and remand for trial on Jones’ claims for breach of implied warranties of fitness and merchantability. Trial shall be confined to the allegations relating to…
-
Edward M. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Algie F. Vaughn, 491 So. 2d 551 (Fla. 1986)…in this case points to greater and not lesser liability, and should offer no shield to resolution of the issues raised by the admitted defect, the fact of the accident, and the resulting grievous injuries. See also Halpryn v. Highland Insurance Co., 426 So. 2d 1050 (Fla.3d DCA 1983) (paint on driveway is a product; proper inquiry focuses on defectiveness of that product); Savage v. Jacobsen Manufacturing Co., 396 So. 2d 731 (Fla.2d DCA), review denied, 402 So. 2d 612 (Fla.1981). The majority’s focus upon the…
-
Helga Huget and Vera Bothman v. City OF Miami Beach, 458 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla.1976); Halpryn v. Highland Insurance Co., 426 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Royal v. Black & Decker Manufacturing Co., 205 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967), cert. denied, 211 So. 2d 214 (Fla.1968). See also U.S. Flourescent Manufacturing Co. v. Florida Power & Light Co., 360 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); B…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- West v. Caterpillar Tractor Co., Inc., 336 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 1976)
- Smith v. Smith, 144 Fla. 500 (Fla. 1940)