Oscar Klein Plumbing And Heating v. Boyd

461 So.2d 221 (Fla. Dist.Ct.App. 1984)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

P operated a wholesale costume jewelry business. Her landlord engaged D to install a water line. This resulted in clouds of concrete dust. Since the dust would eventually damage the jewelry each piece of jewelry required cleaning. D and her adult children worked constantly, and after three months of continuous work, P had to stop cleaning because she developed a bilateral carpal tunnel disease, P sued D and its insurer in negligence for property damage and personal injuries. P requested an instruction on the 'rescue doctrine.' The court instructed the jury that: For the rescue doctrine to apply, you must find three elements: (1) that the defendant was negligent; (2) that the property rescued was in imminent peril; and (3) that the rescuer, here the plaintiff, acted reasonably under the circumstances. The plaintiff must prove these elements by the greater weight of the evidence for you to find that the rescue doctrine applies. D got the verdict. The court entered judgment in favor of P in the amount of $82,000. D appealed.