ESCAMBIA COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, APPELLANT,
v.
LOWELL W. BRAGG, 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.
Escambia County School Board appeals a jury verdict finding it liable for false arrest. The court reverses, holding that a private entity cannot be held liable for false arrest merely by providing police with erroneous information about stolen property without actually detaining the person or instigating arrest by law enforcement.
A private citizen or entity cannot be held liable in tort for false arrest where it neither actually detained the person nor instigated or procured the arrest by law enforcement. Merely providing police with honest, good faith mistakes in reporting an incident does not create tort liability when no detention was requested.
[1] A private citizen may not be held liable in tort for false arrest if they neither actually detained another nor instigated their arrest by law enforcement officers.
[2] A private citizen who makes an honest, good faith mistake in reporting an incident is not liable for false arrest, even if their communication to an officer leads to an a…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“[A] private citizen may not be held liable in tort where he neither actually detained another nor instigated the other's arrest by law enforcement officers. If the private citizen makes an honest, good faith mistake in reporting an incident, the mere fact that his communication to an officer may have caused the victim's arrest does not make him liable when he did not in fact request any detention.”
States the controlling legal standard for private entity liability in false arrest cases, establishing that mere provision of mistaken information to police does not create tort liability.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSchool Board employees identified equipment in Bragg's possession as property missing from Pensacola High School and reported this to police officers …
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 Unlawful Restraint cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Escambia County School Board (hereinafter School Board) appeals from a final judgment entered on a jury verdict in favor of Appellee Bragg on his claim of false arrest, contending, inter alia, that the trial court erred in failing to grant the School Board’s motion for directed verdict. We find merit in this contention. The tort of false imprisonment or false arrest is defined as “the unlawful restraint of a person against his will, the gist of which action is the unlawful detention of the plaintiff and the deprivation of his liberty.” Johnson v. Weiner, 155 Fla. 169, 19 So. 2d 699, 700 (Fla.1944); Harris v. Lewis State Bank, 436 So. 2d 338 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). In Pokorny v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Largo, 382 So. 2d 678, 682 (Fla.1980), the Florida Supreme Court held:
[A] private citizen may not be held liable in tort where he neither actually detained another nor instigated the other’s arrest by law enforcement officers. If the private citizen makes an honest, good faith mistake in reporting an incident, the mere fact that his communication to an officer may have caused the victim’s arrest does not make him liable when he did not in fact request any detention.
After careful review of the evidence presented at trial, we conclude that a directed verdict should have been granted the School Board on the false arrest claim. The School Board employees who acted in this ease neither detained Bragg nor instigated or procured his arrest. See, e.g., Hudson v. Dykes, 402 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Rather, those employees identified for police officers, albeit erroneously, certain equipment in Bragg’s possession as property missing from, and belonging to, Pensacola High School. Both the pursuit and determination of probable cause leading to Bragg’s arrest for grand theft were accomplished by Officer Cramer and Officer Fryer, not by employees of the School Board. See Pokorny; see also, Manis v. Miller, 327 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)(reversing judgment for plaintiff where defendant made a good faith, honest mistake in identifying plaintiff as an armed robber).
Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND with directions to enter judgment in favor of the School Board.
BOOTH, JOANOS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rivers v. Dillards Dep't Store, Inc., 698 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)…se imprisonment or false arrest is defined as ‘the unlawful restraint of a person against his will, the gist of which action is the unlawful detention of the plaintiff and the deprivation of his liberty.’ ” See Escambia County School Board v. Bragg, 680 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (citations omitted). A plaintiff must show that the detention was unreasonable and unwarranted under the circumstances. See Harris v. Lewis State Bank, 436 So. 2d 338 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). “In a false arrest action ... the plainti…
-
Spears v. Albertson's, Inc., 848 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…false imprisonment” or “false arrest” is the unlawful restraint of a person against his or her will, and the gist of the action is the unlawful detention of the person and the deprivation of his or her liberty. See Escambia County Sch. Bd. v. Bragg, 680 So. 2d 571, 572 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). To be civilly hable for false imprisonment, one must have personally and actively participated, either directly or by indirect procurement. See Johnson v. Weiner, 155 Fla. 169, 19 So. 2d 699 (1944). A plaintiff in a false i…
-
Johnson v. Barnes & Noble Booksellers, Inc., 437 F.3d 1112 (11th Cir. 2006)…orida, the tort of false imprisonment is defined as “the unlawful restraint of a person against his will, the gist of which action is the unlawful detention of the plaintiff and the deprivation of his liberty.” Escambia County School Board v. Bragg, 680 So. 2d 571, 572 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1996) (quoting Johnson v. Weiner, 155 Fla. 169, 19 So. 2d 699, 700 (1944)). In a false imprisonment action the plaintiff is required only to “establish imprisonment contrary to his will and the unlawfulness of the detention.” R…
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
- Johnson v. Meyer Weiner also known as M. Weiner, 155 Fla. 169 (Fla. 1944)
- Pokorny v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Largo, 382 So. 2d 678 (Fla. 1980)
- Harris v. The Lewis State Bank, 436 So. 2d 338 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Manis v. Leamon Lee Miller, 327 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
- Hudson v. Dykes, 402 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)