Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1986

Hathaway v. Tindall

Hathaway v. Tindall
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided November 4, 1986 · Jorgenson, Nesbitt, Pearson
497 So. 2d 1272; 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2310; 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10437 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

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.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.