Tallahassee Furniture Co., Inc. v. Harrison
1991 WL 146668, 583 So.2d 744 (1991)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An employer has a duty to exercise reasonable care when hiring or retaining an employee for a position that requires entry into customers' homes, and breaches that duty by failing to make any inquiry into the employee's background when a reasonable investigation would have revealed the employee's unfitness.
Facts:
- Tallahassee Furniture Company, Inc. hired John Allen Turner as a full-time furniture deliveryman without conducting a job interview, requesting references, or requiring him to complete a job application.
- At the time of hiring, Turner had a history that included a juvenile record for armed robbery, adult arrests for battery, a conviction for cutting his wife with a knife, and two psychiatric hospitalizations for paranoid schizophrenia and drug use.
- In October 1985, Turner and another employee delivered a couch to Elizabeth Holland Harrison's apartment, a task which involved entering her home.
- During this delivery, Harrison gave Turner a broken television set she intended to discard.
- On January 1, 1986, Turner returned to Harrison's apartment alone, using the pretext that his employer, Tallahassee Furniture, required a receipt for the television set he had received.
- Harrison recognized Turner as the deliveryman and, after he asked, permitted him to enter her apartment to use the bathroom.
- Once inside, Turner retrieved a knife from the kitchen and brutally attacked Harrison, causing permanent and severe injuries.
- During his employment, Turner was a heavy intravenous drug user with visible 'track marks,' and Tallahassee Furniture's management was aware of at least one of his prior psychiatric hospitalizations.
Procedural Posture:
- Elizabeth Holland Harrison filed suit against Tallahassee Furniture Company, Inc. in a Florida trial court, alleging negligent hiring, negligent retention, and liability on an agency theory.
- The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Tallahassee Furniture.
- Harrison, as appellant, appealed to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
- The appellate court reversed the summary judgment and remanded the case for trial.
- On remand, a jury returned a general verdict in favor of Harrison, awarding her $1,900,000 in compensatory damages and $600,000 in punitive damages.
- Tallahassee Furniture, as appellant, appealed the jury verdict to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District, with Harrison as the appellee.
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 employer breach its duty of reasonable care by failing to conduct any background investigation before hiring an employee for a delivery position requiring entry into customers' homes, where a reasonable inquiry would have revealed a history of violence, drug abuse, and mental illness?
Opinions:
Majority - Smith, J.
Yes. An employer breaches its duty of reasonable care by failing to conduct a reasonable inquiry into an employee's background before placing them in a position that requires entering customers' homes. The evidence was sufficient for a jury to find Tallahassee Furniture liable for negligent hiring and retention. The court reasoned that for jobs involving entry into private residences, the employer has a responsibility to make 'some inquiry' to ensure the employee is not a threat. Tallahassee Furniture made no investigation whatsoever. The employer's negligence was the proximate cause of Harrison's injuries because the employment gave Turner authorized access to Harrison, allowing him to learn her living situation and later use his status as an employee to gain entry under a false pretext. The employee's criminal act was a foreseeable consequence of hiring an individual with a known history of violence and mental instability for an in-home position. The court also held that while submitting the case on an agency theory was an error because the attack was not in the scope of employment, the general verdict could be upheld on the valid grounds of negligent hiring and retention.
Concurring in part and dissenting in part - Nimmons, J.
This opinion concurs with the majority's reasoning on the issues of negligent hiring and retention but dissents on the issue of punitive damages. The judge argued that while Tallahassee Furniture's conduct was negligent, it did not rise to the level of extreme misconduct or reckless disregard for human life required to sustain an award of punitive damages under Florida law.
Analysis:
This case is significant for clarifying the scope of an employer's duty in negligent hiring and retention claims in Florida, particularly for employees who perform in-home services. It establishes that an employer cannot remain willfully ignorant of an employee's background; the law will impute knowledge of information that a reasonable investigation would have uncovered. The decision broadens the concept of proximate cause in this context, finding liability even when the criminal act occurs months after the initial job-related contact and is not within the scope of employment, as long as the employment created the unique opportunity and risk of harm. This precedent places a substantial burden on employers to conduct due diligence, influencing hiring practices for any business sending personnel into private homes.
