RUBY MCNEASE, D/B/A TALLAHASSEE PEST CONTROL, APPELLANT,
v.
GEORGE BONE AND CARLENE BONE, APPELLEES

Fla. 1st DCA | 1984-04-16
No. AU-158
SMITH and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.
448 So. 2d 1160 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Tallahassee Pest Control appeals a judgment for damages awarded to home buyers (the Bones) based on negligent termite inspection. The court affirmed, holding that the pest control company owed a duty to the buyers as third-party beneficiaries of the inspection contract and breached that duty by failing to detect a fungal infestation.


Holding

The court affirmed the judgment, holding that Tallahassee Pest Control was negligent in performing the inspection. The pest control company owed a duty to the Bones as members of the class of persons intended to be protected by the statutory and administrative requirements, the harm was the type intended to be prevented, and the breach proximately caused the Bones' damages.


Headnotes

[1] A pest control company's failure to adhere to statutory and administrative requirements for inspection reports constitutes a breach of duty.

[2] Buyers of a home are within the class of persons intended to be protected by statutes and rules governing pest inspection reports.

Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“We conclude that the Bones, as buyers of the home, were within the class of persons intended to be protected by the statute and rule, that the harm which occurred was the type, of harm which the statute and rule were intended to prevent, and that the breach of the duty imposed by the statute and rule was the proximate cause of the Bones' damages”

Establishes the three-part negligence test and holds that home buyers are within the protected class of statutory inspection requirements

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Robert L. Bell contracted with Tallahassee Pest Control for a five-year termite treatment plan. When the Bells sold their home to the Bones, they prov…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
MILLS, Judge.

MILLS, Judge.

McNease, d/b/a Tallahassee Pest Control (Tallahassee Pest Control), seeks reversal of a final judgment awarding costs which the Bones incurred as a result of the negligence of Tallahassee Pest Control. We affirm.

The record shows that Robert L. Bell entered into a five-year contract with Tallahassee Pest Control for treatment of his home for termites. While the contract was still in effect, Bell and his wife agreed to sell their home to George and Carlene Bone. Among other things, the contract for sale required the Bells to furnish a termite inspection report to the Bones, which they did by having the house reinspected pursuant to the five-year contract with Tallahassee Pest Control. After making the inspection, Tallahassee Pest Control submitted a report indicating that it had inspected the premises and that there was “no active visable (sic) evidence of Subterranean Termites or other wood destroying oregin (sic).” In reliance upon that representation, the Bones moved into their new home.

Shortly thereafter, they heard from a neighbor that the house possibly had a mildew problem. Mrs. Bone had the house inspected by two contractors who found extensive damage to the subfloor caused by a fungal infestation. The Bones hired one of the contractors to perform the necessary repair work.

They subsequently filed suit against the Bells and Tallahassee Pest Control, alleging that Tallahassee Pest Control negligently performed the inspection, that the Bells fraudulently concealed the existence of material defects in the home, and that the Bells breached the contract for sale of the home by providing a defective termite inspection report. It was also argued at the-final hearing that the Bones were intended third-party beneficiaries of the termite inspection contract between the Bells and Tallahassee Pest Control.

The trial court, without stating its reasoning, entered final judgment in favor of the Bones and against Tallahassee Pest Control for the amount expended by the Bones in repairing their home. No liability was found on the part of the Bells. This appeal by Tallahassee Pest Control ensued.

We affirm the final judgment on the theory that Tallahassee Pest Control was negligent in making the inspection.

Section 482.226(1), Florida Statutes (1981), requires that inspection reports submitted by persons licensed under Chapter 482, Florida Statutes (1981), be “in accordance with good industry practice and standards on a form prescribed, by the department_” (Emphasis added) In the administrative rule implementing the statute, Rule 10D-55.142(2)(c), Florida Administrative Code, the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services required that licensees use HRS Form 1145 to report their findings. The Bones contend and Tallahassee Pest Control concedes that the use of HRS Form 1145 would have required the reporting of evidence of a fungal infestation such as was present in the Bones’ home.

We conclude that the Bones, as buyers of the home, were within the class of persons intended to be protected by the statute and rule, that the harm which occurred was the type, of harm which the statute and rule were intended to prevent, and that the breach of the duty imposed by the statute and rule was the proximate cause of the Bones’ damages, de Jesus v. Seaboard Coastline Railroad, 281 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 1973).

Tallahassee Pest Control also contends that there was no evidence showing the presence of a fungal infestation in the home on the date of the inspection. We find there was ample evidence of this fact to support the final judgment.

AFFIRMED.

SMITH and NIMMONS, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Rayner v. Wise Realty Co. OF Tallahassee, 504 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
    …uage to bar recovery against him for negligence is unavailing for the same reasons. For authority on the question of whether a cause of action exists against Noegel for negligence, we need go no further than this court’s decision in McNease v. Bone, 448 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). There, Mr. and Mrs. Bone sued McNease, d/b/a Tallahassee Pest Control, seeking damages resulting from fungal infestation in a home they had purchased from the Bells. As in this case, Tallahassee Pest Control had filed a termite…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw