## Facts

- Warren C. Sanders, an undercover officer with the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office, was killed in a gunfight during an undercover investigation.
- Sanders was shot fifteen times; expert testimony attributed death to two fatal gunshot wounds inflicted “split seconds” apart—one to the chest and one to the abdomen.
- One fatal shot was fired by an assailant and the other was inadvertently fired by another officer.
- Sanders wore a bullet-resistant vest manufactured by American Body Armor and Equipment, Inc. that was built to Sheriff’s Office specifications.
- The specifications required a “buttfit” vest, in which the front and back panels meet at the sides without overlapping, leaving an unprotected area at the side seam/abutment.
- The chest fatal wound entered through the side abutment area not protected by the non-overlapping panels; the abdominal fatal wound was below and outside the vest’s coverage.
- The estate sued, alleging negligence based on failure to warn that the vest provided limited protection at its edges and side-abutment areas.
- A jury returned a verdict for the estate on the failure-to-warn theory.

## Issues

1. Whether, under Florida causation law, a shot through an allegedly defective or insufficiently warned area can be a legal cause of death when another independently fatal wound is inflicted nearly simultaneously.
2. Whether a manufacturer has a duty to warn about a vest’s limited protection at a plainly visible, non-overlapping side seam, or whether the condition is open and obvious as a matter of law.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s entry of a directed verdict for the manufacturer (making the alternative new-trial ruling effectively moot).
- The court rejected the trial court’s causation rationale, explaining that Florida law allows concurrent causes; multiple nearly simultaneous fatal injuries may each be a legal cause.
- The court nonetheless upheld judgment for the manufacturer on an independent ground: the lack of side coverage at the buttfit seam was open and obvious, so no duty to warn existed and the failure-to-warn claim failed as a matter of law.

## Legal Principles

- In Florida negligence law, concurrent causes may each constitute proximate (legal) causes when each substantially contributes to a single injury, even if another cause would have been independently sufficient.
- A manufacturer generally has no duty to warn of dangers or limitations that are patent, open, and obvious to the ordinary user.
- A directed verdict is proper where, viewing the evidence most favorably to the nonmoving party, the law imposes no duty supporting the asserted negligence theory.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed judgment for the vest manufacturer because the vest’s non-overlapping side seam created an obviously unprotected area, eliminating any legal duty to warn, even though the court clarified that concurrent, nearly simultaneous fatal wounds can each be a legal cause of death under Florida law.


Sanders v. Am. Body Armor & Equip., Inc., 652 So. 2d 883 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. 1995)