www.rissman.com
201 EAST PINE STREET
15TH FLOOR
ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32801
TELEPHONE (407) 839-0120
TELECOPIER (407) 841-9726
ORLANDO@RISSMAN.COM
1 NORTH DALE MABRY HWY
11TH FLOOR
TAMPA, FLORIDA 33609
TELEPHONE (813) 221-3114
TELECOPIER (813) 221-3033
TAMPA@RISSMAN.COM

900 S.E. 3RD AVENUE
SUITE 210
FT. LAUDERDALE, FL 33316
TELEPHONE (954) 526-5480
TELECOPIER (407) 841-9726
FTLAUDERDALE@RISSMAN.COM

709 SEBASTIAN BOULEVARD
SUITE B
SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958
TELEPHONE (772) 228-3228
TELECOPIER (772) 228-3229
SEBASTIAN@RISSMAN.COM

 

 

In Suker v. White Family Limited Partnership, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D1368e (Fla. 4th DCA June 8, 2016), plaintiffs, Cathy and Johnny Suker, appealed final summary judgment entered in favor of defendant, PSL Donuts, LLC, arising out of a slip and fall accident that occurred on defendant's premises, a Dunkin Donuts store. The trial court had granted final summary judgment based on § 768.0755, Fla. Stat., finding that plaintiffs had failed to present any issue of genuine fact as to whether defendant knew or should have known of the dangerous conditions or that the dangerous conditions occurred with regularity and were foreseeable.

On review, the 4th DCA emphasized that if there are material facts at issue and the slightest doubt exists, summary judgment must be reversed. In this case, the 4th DCA found that plaintiffs responded to defendant's motion for summary judgment by filing depositions of three witnesses to the subject incident that tended to show defendant had actual or constructive knowledge of dangerous conditions on its premises. Specifically, the deposition testimony suggested there was evidence that the tile at the entrance of defendant's premises was wet at the time of the subject incident.

As such, the 4th DCA found that plaintiffs had presented a genuine issue of material fact and that the trial court had erred in granting summary judgment for defendant. The 4th DCA reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

 


This summary was prepared by Ellen Ryan of our firm.


Ellen Ryan

 

 

41 Fla. L. Weekly D1368e

 

Torts -- Premises liability -- Slip and fall -- Trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of defendants based on finding that plaintiffs failed to present any genuine issues of material fact as to whether defendant knew or should have known of dangerous conditions or that dangerous conditions occurred with regularity and were therefore foreseeable where plaintiffs filed depositions of witnesses that tended to show defendant's actual or constructive knowledge of dangerous conditions

CATHY SUKER and JOHNNY SUKER, Appellants, v. WHITE FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and PSL DONUTS, LLC, Appellees. 4th District. Case No. 4D15-1350. June 8, 2016. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; James W. Midelis, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562013CA003123. Counsel: William T. Viergever of Sonneborn Rutter & Cooney, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant. Joan Carlos Wizel, Amir Ghaeenzadeh and Shaun Robert Koby of Lydecker Diaz, Miami, for Appellee PSL Donuts, LLC.

(PER CURIAM.) This appeal stems from a slip and fall accident that occurred in front of a Dunkin Donuts operated by defendant PSL Donuts, LLC. The plaintiffs, Cathy and Johnny Suker, appeal the final summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant.1 The trial court granted summary judgment based on Section 768.0755, Florida Statutes (2013), finding that the plaintiffs failed to present any genuine issues of material fact as to whether the defendant knew or should have known of the dangerous conditions or that the dangerous conditions occurred with regularity and were therefore foreseeable. We reverse.

"A trial court's entry of a final summary judgment is reviewed de novo." Burton v. MDC PGA Plaza Corp., 78 So.3d 732, 733 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). "In reviewing a summary judgment, [the court] must consider all record evidence in a light most favorable to the non-moving party. If material facts are at issue and the slightest doubt exists, summary judgment must be reversed." Aery v. Wallace Lincoln-Mercury, LLC, 118 So. 3d 904, 910 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (alteration in original) (quoting Mills v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 27 So. 3d 95, 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)).

In this case, where plaintiffs filed the depositions of three witnesses, including the deposition of an employee of the defendant, that tended to show the defendant's actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous conditions that existed at the tiled entrance to the establishment when the tile was wet, we conclude that genuine issues of material fact remained and that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for the defendant. We also find the defendant's alternative arguments for affirming the summary judgment to be unpersuasive.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Reversed and Remanded. (CIKLIN, C.J., TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.)

__________________

1 The plaintiffs do not appeal the summary judgment entered in favor of White Family Limited Partnership.



* * *