CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH, APPELLANT,

v.

LORI BETH LIPKIN, ETC., ET AL., APPELLEES; CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH, APPELLANT, V. JUDITH LIPKIN AND WILLIAM LIPKIN, APPELLEES; CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH, APPELLANT, V. LORI BETH LIPKIN, JUDITH ANNE LIPKIN AND ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES; CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH, APPELLANT, V. LORI BETH LIPKIN, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HER MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND, JUDITH ANNE LIPKIN AND JUDITH ANNE LIPKIN, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLEES

Citator

Cited By (18 total)

• Vasques v. Marcelino Lopez, 509 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
  …ses, and that the premises were under the tenant’s control. Appellant asserts that, based upon the evidence, a jury could infer actual knowledge on the part of the landlord. See Ward v. Young, 504 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Anderson v. Walthal, 468 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Appellant further asserts that because the tenants could be lawfully evicted at will, the landlord had sufficient control over the premises to be liable for the dangerous condition created by the dog. See Uccello v. Laudenslayer…
• Kusch v. Ballard, 645 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
  …. The receiving lawyer had a duty to disclose to his client any communications received in the course of representation. See R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-1.4(a). Moreover, the law imputes the knowledge of the agent to the principal. Anderson v. Walthal, 468 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). If the client knows the contents of the letter as a result of previous disclosure by the disqualified lawyer, surely any successor lawyer would learn the same contents from the client himself. Hence it is difficult for me to com…
• State v. Peters, 534 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
  …ter. See, e.g., Carter v. City of Stuart, 468 So. 2d 955 (Fla.1985); Vasques v. Lopez, 509 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); White v. Whitworth, 509 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Ward v. Young, 504 So. 2d 528 (Fla.2d DCA 1987); Anderson v. Walthal, 468 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Manucy v. Manucy, 362 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Pit bulls have even been considered weapons in first-degree assaults. See State v. Livingston, 420 N.W. 2d 223 (Minn.Ct.App.1988). For a more complete and graphic description…