SC04-1929 – Marjorie Willis, Et Vir., v. Gami Golden Glades, Llc., Etc., Et Al.

State: Florida

Docket No: SC04-1929

Case Date: 10/18/2007

Preview:Supreme Court of Florida
____________ No. SC04-1929 ____________ MARJORIE WILLIS, et vir, Petitioners, vs. GAMI GOLDEN GLADES, LLC., etc., et al., Respondents. [October 18, 2007] PER CURIAM. We have for review a decision of a district court of appeal on the following questions, which the court certified to be of great public importance: 1. IS THE EVIDENCE THAT THE PLAINTIFF WAS TOUCHED AGAINST HER WILL BY THE PISTOL PLACED TO HER HEAD AND IN "PATTING DOWN" HER BODY SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY THE FLORIDA IMPACT RULE? SEE AND COMPARE, E.G., GRACEY V. EAKER, 837 SO. 2D 348, 355 (FLA. 2002); ZELL V. MEEK, 665 SO. 2D 1048 (FLA. 1995); EAGLE-PICHER INDUSTRIES, INC. V. COX, 481 SO. 2D 517 (FLA. 3D DCA 1985), REVIEW DENIED, 492 SO. 2D 1331 (FLA. 1986). 2. IS THE EVIDENCE THAT THE PLAINTIFF WAS APPARENTLY THE OBJECT OF AN ASSAULT AND MULTIPLE BATTERIES SUFFICIENT TO SATISFY A "FREE STANDING TORT" EXCEPTION TO THE IMPACT RULE WHICH MAY

EXIST IN FLORIDA? SEE KUSH V. LLOYD, 616 SO. 2D 415 (FLA. 1992). 3. IS THE INNKEEPER-GUEST RELATIONSHIP INVOLVED IN THIS CASE A "SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP" UNDER AN EXCEPTION TO THE IMPACT RULE WHICH MAY EXIST IN FLORIDA? ROWELL V. HOLT, 850 SO. 2D 474 (FLA. 2003); GRACEY V. EAKER, 837 SO. 2D 348 (FLA. 2002). 4. SHOULD THE IMPACT RULE BE ABOLISHED? Willis v. Gami Golden Glades, LLC, 881 So. 2d 703, 705-06 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (footnote omitted). We have jurisdiction. See art. V,

Download SC04-1929 – Marjorie Willis, Et Vir., v. Gami Golden Glades, Llc., Etc.,