Hines v. Columbia Livestock Market of Lake City, Inc.

491 So. 2d 612, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1586, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8940
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 22, 1986·No. No. BI-468·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the summary judgment for defendant, Columbia Livestock Market of Lake City, Inc. Under the evidence shown in the record, it is clear that the veterinarian, Dr. Bryan Smith, was an independent contractor and not the agent or employee of defendant. Wendland v. Akers, 356 So.2d 368 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). Neither party has argued whether defendant was under a nondelegable duty to administer the brucellosis tests with reasonable care, which might make the livestock market responsible for the alleged negligence of Dr. Smith, so we find it unnecessary to consider such issue.

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS, ZEHMER and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hines v. Columbia Livestock Market of Lake City, Inc., 491 So. 2d 612, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1586, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8940 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

491 So. 2d 612 (Hines v. Columbia Livestock Market of Lake City, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hines v. Columbia Livestock Market of Lake City, Inc.
516 So. 2d 1040 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
HOME SAV. OF AMERICA, FA v. Roehner
491 So. 2d 612 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)