MARGARET NANCE, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES ARCHER SMITH HOSPITAL, INC., 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.
Margaret Nance appealed a directed verdict judgment in a wrongful death action against James Archer Smith Hospital, alleging the hospital negligently turned away her husband's killer (Franklin Clayton) who was in an LSD-induced emergency state. The court affirmed the judgment, finding no actionable negligence due to lack of proximate causation and unforeseeable intervening criminal conduct.
The hospital was not liable because there was no actionable negligence. Franklin's violent behavior that resulted in the stabbing was not reasonably foreseeable based on his conduct at the hospital, and the hospital lacked the medical facilities necessary to treat him anyway. The independent intervening criminal act of Franklin stabbing the victim constituted an unforeseeable intervening cause breaking any chain of proximate causation.
[1] A hospital is not liable for negligence when an intervening act of a third party, which is not reasonably foreseeable, is the proximate cause of the injury.
[2] A directed verdict for a defendant is proper when the plaintiff fails to present evidence demonstrating that the defendant's alleged negligence was the proximate cause of…
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“The question of proximate cause in a negligence action is one for the court where there is an active and efficient intervening cause.”
Establishes the legal standard for determining proximate causation when independent intervening causes are present.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFranklin Clayton, acting strangely from LSD ingestion, was brought to James Archer Smith Hospital by his grandmother. Hospital personnel advised the g…
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 Intervening Cause cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff appeals a judgment for defendant entered in accordance with motion for directed verdict in this action for wrongful death.
The unfortunate events giving rise to this case are as follows. On August IS, 1971 Franklin Clayton, a young male, was behaving strangely and his grandmother, Annie Clayton, became concerned. It appears Franklin had taken a pill containing LSD. Grandmother Clayton along with two companions drove Franklin to James Archer Smith Hospital, defendant herein. Upon entering the hospital, the personnel were informed that Franklin had taken “acid.” Grandmother Clayton was then advised by the ward clerk that the Hospital did not have the proper testing facilities to ascertain the type of drug Franklin had taken which was necessary before proper treatment could be prescribed and they should take him to Jackson Memorial Hospital which had the necessary testing facilities. Thereupon Franklin, his grandmother and the two companions got into their car and began to drive to Jackson Memorial Hospital. Shortly thereafter Franklin jumped out of the car, ran berserk through an apartment building and fatally stabbed Earnest Nance.- Margaret Nance, wife of the victim and appellant herein, filed a wrongful death action against the Hospital and alleged the Hospital was negligent in turning away Clayton inasmuch as he was an emergency case and a danger to himself and others. The jury returned a verdict for $150,000 in favor of Mrs. Nance. The trial judge, having reserved ruling on defendant’s motion for directed verdict made at the close of plaintiff’s case and again at the conclusion of all the evidence, entered judgment for the defendant.
Plaintiff Nance appeals from this judgment. We affirm.-
The question of proximate cause in a negligence action is one for the court where there is an active and efficient intervening cause. Kwoka v. Campbell, Fla. App.1974, 296 So. 2d 629. Further, where the negligence of another, constituting an independent intervening efficient cause of the accident, was not reasonably foreseeable, no liability may be fastened on the defendant. Rawls v. Ziegler, Fla. 1958, 107 So. 2d 601.
The record is replete with evidence that Franklin, during the time he was present at the defendant Hospital, did not exhibit any behavior which could be termed erratic or threatening and we conclude there was no reasonable foreseeability that Franklin would engage in the violent behavior which resulted in the death of plaintiff’s husband. We also note that defendant hospital did not have the facilities to conduct the necessary tests to prescribe treatment.
The trial judge was correct in granting defendant’s motion for directed verdict and entering judgment in accordance therewith.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Holiday Inns, Inc. v. Shelburne, 576 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…v. Gainsville Inns Assoc., 347 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977): While the question of proximate cause in a negligence action is one for the court where there is an active and efficient intervening cause, Nance v. James Archer Smith Hospital, Inc., 329 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), still if such intervening cause is either foreseeable or might reasonably have been foreseeable by the defendant, his negligence may be considered the proximate cause of the injury notwithstanding the intervening cause. 347 So.…
-
Fouad Banat v. Armando, 430 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…their argument that the summary judgment should be affirmed, defendants argue that the question of proximate cause is one for the court where there is an active and efficient intervening cause, relying on Nance v. James Archer Smith Hospital, Inc., 329 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), cert. denied, 339 So. 2d 1171 (Fla.1976) and Kwoka v. Campbell, 296 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 304 So. 2d 450 (Fla.1974). The duties of the court , in any case in which “proximate cause” is at issue involve mak…
-
Orlando Executive Park, Inc. v. P. D. R., 402 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…, the court re-stated the traditional rule on intervening cause: While the question of proximate cause in a negligence action is one for the court where there is an active and efficient intervening cause, Nance v. James Archer Smith Hospital, Inc., 329 So. 2d 377 (Fla.3d DCA 1976), still if such intervening cause is either foreseeable or might reasonably have been foreseen by the defendant, his negligence may be considered the proximate cause of the injury notwithstanding the intervening cause. 347 So. 2d a…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Kwoka v. Campbell, 296 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Rawls v. Ziegler, 107 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 1958)