This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: , we find that this testimony encompassed less than
one page of some 150 pages of testimony by Professor White, the majority of which was
VII. PUNITIVE DAMAGES
Without further recitation of the egregious facts of this case, we are of the [*764] view
that the trial court did not err in allowing the jury to consider punitive damages. Based
upon the information appellant knew or reasonably should have discovered about Turner,
the jury could reasonably have determined that appellant's conduct in hiring or retaining
Turner was so gross and flagrant as to show a reckless disregard of human life or of the
safety of persons exposed to the effect of its conduct; or that its conduct so entirely
lacked any care that the appellant must have been consciously indifferent to the
consequences; or that appellant's conduct shows wantonness or recklessness, or a grosslycareless disregard of the safety and welfare of the public; or such conduct showed a
reckless indifference [**61] to the rights of others which is equivalent to an intentional
violation of those rights. See American Cyanamid Co. v. Roy, 498 So.2d 859 (Fla. 1986);
Como Oil Company, Inc. v. O'Loughlin, 466 So.2d 1061 (Fla. 1985); White Construction
Co. v. Dupont, 455 So.2d 1026, 1029 (Fla. 1984); Johns-Manville Sales Corp. v.
Janssens, 463 So.2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), rev. denied, 467 So.2d 999 (Fla. 1985).
Since Turner's attack on Harrison occurred outside the scope of his employment,
appellant could not be held vicariously liable for Turner's acts. Mercury Motors Express,
Inc. v. Smith, 393 So.2d 545 (Fla. 1981). However, as appellant's argument tacitly
concedes, appellant may be held liable for its own acts which rise to a level of extreme
misconduct within the standard adopted by the court in White Construction v. Dupont,
supra. We have examined appellant's argument addressing its liability under this standard
and find that it is based entirely upon appellant's version of the facts, which differs
substantially from the facts the jury co...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.
- Spring '08