Fabbiano v. Demings
2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 10557
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Appellant injured at Pleasure Island; staff called security due to suspected fake IDs; off-duty deputy Krantz escorted Appellant and companions to security booth.
- Appellant alleges Deputy Krantz threw him to ground and twisted his arm without provocation, re-fracturing a previously fractured arm.
- Original one-count complaint alleged negligence against the Orange County Sheriff; statute of limitations for battery had expired when Appellant sought to amend.
- Appellant sought to amend to allege battery within Deputy Krantz’s employment scope; trial court denied amendment and entered judgment for Appellee on the original negligence claim.
- Rule 1.190(c) allows relation back if the amended pleading arises from the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence as the original.
- Court held amendment should relate back; same occurrence and injuries; reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the amendment relates back under Rule 1.190(c). | Appellant argues same occurrence; same conduct; battery relates back. | Appellee contends new cause of action does not relate back. | Yes; amended claim relates back. |
Key Cases Cited
- C.H. v. Whitney, 987 So.2d 96 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (liberal relation-back interpretation)
- West Volusia Hospital Authority v. Jones, 668 So.2d 635 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (new and distinct cause of action not required to bar relation back if based on same facts)
- Associated Television & Communications, Inc. v. Dutch Village Mobile Homes of Melbourne, Ltd., 347 So.2d 746 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) (test: same conduct/occurrence; amended pleading need not state identical cause)
- Keel v. Brown, 162 So.2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964) (interpretation of relation back under prior framework)
- Flores v. Riscomp Indus., Inc., 35 So.3d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (test for relation back includes general fact situation)
- Armiger v. Associated Outdoor Clubs, Inc., 48 So.3d 864 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (amendment based on new legal theory relates back if same occurrence)
