Hathaway v. Tindall

Florida District Courts of Appeal
Hathaway v. Tindall, 497 So. 2d 1272 (1986)
11 Fla. L. Weekly 2310; 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10437
Jorgenson, Nesbitt, Pearson

Hathaway v. Tindall

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Even if, arguendo, the plaintiffs established that the defendant hospital made certain representations that might lead reasonable persons to believe that the radiologist in question was the hospital’s agent, they utterly failed to prove that they were aware of, much less relied on, any of these representations or detrimentally changed their position in reliance on them. See Orlando Executive Park, Inc. v. Robbins, 433 So.2d 491 (Fla. 1983). Therefore, the trial court was correct in rejecting the plaintiffs’ claim that the radiologist was an apparent agent of the hospital and in directing a verdict for the hospital. The plaintiffs’ remaining point on appeal is without merit.

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Raymond HATHAWAY and Betty Hathaway, his wife v. Robert TINDALL, M.D. Dr. John T. McDonald Foundation, d/b/a Doctors' Hospital
Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published