Case Name: Robert R. SHAFFER, Jr., and Jill R. Shaffer, his wife, Appellants, v. WELLS FARGO GUARD SERVICES, A SUBSIDIARY OF BURNS INTERNATIONAL SECURITY SERVICES, A SUBSIDIARY OF BAKER INDUSTRIES, INC., Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1988-03-01
Citations: 528 So. 2d 389
Docket Number: No. 86-3132
Parties: Robert R. SHAFFER, Jr., and Jill R. Shaffer, his wife, Appellants, v. WELLS FARGO GUARD SERVICES, A SUBSIDIARY OF BURNS INTERNATIONAL SECURITY SERVICES, A SUBSIDIARY OF BAKER INDUSTRIES, INC., Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 528
Pages: 389–392

Head Matter:
Robert R. SHAFFER, Jr., and Jill R. Shaffer, his wife, Appellants, v. WELLS FARGO GUARD SERVICES, A SUBSIDIARY OF BURNS INTERNATIONAL SECURITY SERVICES, A SUBSIDIARY OF BAKER INDUSTRIES, INC., Appellee.
No. 86-3132.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
March 1, 1988.
On Rehearing June 7, 1988.
Barnett & Hammer and Richard A. Barnett, Hollywood, for appellants.
Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Strickroot and Fred R. Ober and Steven E. Stark, Miami, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and DANIEL S. PEARSON, JJ.

Opinion:
DANIEL S. PEARSON, Judge.
This is an appeal from an order dismissing with prejudice the Shaffers' first amended complaint. We affirm.
In essence, the complaint alleges that Robert Shaffer, Jr., an employee of Citizens Federal Savings and Loan, was assaulted in the bank by a man who mistakenly believed that Shaffer was romantically involved with the man's wife, a fellow employee of Shaffer's; at the time of the assault, the bank had a contract with Wells Fargo Guard Services which provided, in part, that Wells Fargo would "help provide the [Bank] with a system of protection for its assets and employees against certain hazards"; and that Wells Fargo was negligent and breached the contract when it failed to protect Shaffer from the man who mistook himself for a cuckold.
Although it can be fairly said that Shaffer was an intended third-party beneficiary of the contract between the bank and Wells Fargo, it cannot be fairly said that the contract contemplated protecting bank employees from hazards totally unconnected to the activities or business of the bank. We think the broadest reading that can be given to the otherwise undefined "certain hazards" is that the term means "certain hazards associated with carrying on a bank's business." Extracurricular dalliances — whether real or imagined — with fellow employees, while surely forms of carrying on, are certainly none of the bank's business.
We conclude, therefore, that Wells Fargo had no duty to protect Shaffer against the hazard of violence from an irate husband and thus cannot be liable to Shaffer in either contract or tort.
Affirmed.
SCHWARTZ, C.J., concurs.