C. I. T. Corp. v. Brewer
1941 Fla. LEXIS 1119, 200 So. 910, 146 Fla. 247 (1941)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A creditor's contractual right to repossess property upon default does not permit the use of force, violence, or actions that constitute a breach of the peace. If a creditor's agent commits a trespass or an assault and battery while attempting a repossession, the creditor is liable for the resulting damages.
Facts:
- Amos purchased a car under a conditional sales contract, which was assigned to C.I.T. Corporation.
- Amos delivered the car to a garage owned by J. B. Brewer, Inc. for repairs but did not pay the repair bill.
- The garage retained possession of the vehicle on its premises due to the unpaid bill.
- Denmark, an agent for C.I.T. Corporation, went to the garage and demanded that J. B. Brewer pay Amos's defaulted contract payments.
- Brewer refused and explicitly told Denmark that he could not remove the car until the repair bill was paid.
- While Brewer was momentarily distracted, Denmark entered the car and attempted to drive it off the premises using the starter motor, as the key was missing.
- Brewer returned and tried to remove Denmark from the car, leading to a physical altercation.
- During the altercation, Denmark struck or kicked Brewer in the abdomen, causing a serious hernia.
Procedural Posture:
- J. B. Brewer filed a lawsuit against C.I.T. Corporation in a trial court, seeking damages for assault and battery.
- Following a trial, the court entered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Brewer.
- C.I.T. Corporation, as the plaintiff in error (appellant), appealed the judgment by seeking a writ of error from the appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does an agent's attempt to forcibly repossess a vehicle, against the express denial of the person in lawful possession, constitute a trespass and assault for which the agent's employer is liable?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
Yes. An attempt to seize manual control of a chattel and remove it from the premises of one in lawful possession, after being expressly denied the right to do so, constitutes a trespass for which damages may be awarded. The right to peaceably retake property under a contract does not contemplate trespasses or assaults. Any action manifesting force or violence, or that is naturally calculated to provoke a breach of the peace, renders the actor a trespasser and negates the right to retake the property. Because Denmark was acting as an agent for C.I.T. Corporation with general authority to repossess property, the corporation is liable for the assault and battery he committed within the scope of his employment.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms the critical legal limitation on self-help remedies, specifically in the context of secured transactions. It establishes that the contractual right to 'peaceful' repossession ends the moment the creditor's agent is met with opposition, requiring the creditor to then seek judicial remedies like a writ of replevin. This precedent protects debtors and third parties in lawful possession from potentially violent confrontations over property. The ruling also reinforces the doctrine of vicarious liability, holding employers responsible for torts committed by their agents during the course of their authorized duties, thereby incentivizing creditors to properly train and supervise their repossession agents.
Unlock the full brief for C. I. T. Corp. v. Brewer