REGINE EVENS, APPELLANT,
v.
EASTERN AIR LINES, INC., A CORPORATION, APPELLEE
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.
Regine Evens appealed a summary judgment entered in favor of Eastern Air Lines following her slip-and-fall injury on an aircraft. The court affirmed, holding that Evens failed to present evidence of Eastern's actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition that caused her fall.
The court held that Evens failed to present any evidence, direct or circumstantial, of Eastern's notice of the dangerous condition, and therefore summary judgment was proper because no negligence was shown.
[1] A plaintiff in a slip and fall action must demonstrate that the defendant had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition.
[2] Constructive notice of a dangerous condition may be proven by circumstantial evidence.
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“In order to recover for injuries in a "slip and fall" accident, the plaintiff must show either actual notice of the dangerous condition or that the condition existed for such a length of time that in the exercise of ordinary care the owners should have known of it and taken action to remedy it or to guard the plaintiff from harm therefrom.”
Establishes the legal standard plaintiff must meet in slip-and-fall negligence cases
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEvens slipped and fell in the galley area of an Eastern Air Lines flight. She testified in deposition that she saw nothing on the floor before falling…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Burden Of Proof In Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLS, Judge.
Evens appeals the entry of a final summary judgment on behalf of Eastern. We affirm.
Evens filed suit against Eastern following a “slip and fall” incident which occurred after she boarded an Eastern flight. She alleged negligence in failure to protect passengers from slippery substances in the galley area, to keep the' area safe, to inspect for dangerous conditions, and to erect warning devices or station personnel around the area to warn of the dangerous condition.
Evens testified in a deposition taken by Eastern that she saw nothing on the floor prior to her fall, and did not look on the floor afterwards. Therefore, she could not explain what caused her fall, only that she felt “something wet” while on the floor. Following this deposition, Eastern moved for summary judgment, alleging that Evens failed “to demonstrate that [Eastern] had actual or constructive knowledge of the alleged foreign substance on which [Evens] allegedly slipped and fell.” Four affidavits were attached from the flight attendants assigned to the flight. They all similarly averred that, as is customary, the plane had been inspected for debris and hazards immediately before the incident, between the de-embarkation of previous passengers and the boarding of the group which included Evens. The inspection revealed nothing. None of the attendants observed the alleged fall. Evens filed no opposing affidavits, and the motion was granted.
In order to recover for injuries in a “slip and fall” accident, the plaintiff must show either actual notice of the dangerous condition or that the condition existed for such a length of time that in the exercise of ordinary care the owners should have known of it and taken action to remedy it or to guard the plaintiff from harm therefrom. Nance v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 436 So. 2d 1075, 1076 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). The latter standard, known as “constructive notice,” may be proved by circumstantial evidence. Nance; Camina v. Parliament Insurance Company, 417 So. 2d 1093, 1094 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
Although it is true that summary judgment proceedings should be applied with special caution in negligence actions, Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966), when there is no conflict over any genuine material issue of fact, summary judgment is appropriate. Food Fair Stores of Florida, Inc. v. Patty, 109 So. 2d 5 (Fla.1959).
The material issue herein is, of course, the existence of actual or constructive notice that the dangerous condition, a slick spot, was present. Uncontroverted affidavits negate the existence of actual notice, since no spot was observed. With regard to constructive notice, no facts whatever exist indicating the length of time the unidentified spot was present, such as dirt, footprints or the like. See Montgomery v. Florida Jitney Jungle Stores, Inc., 281 So. 2d 302 (Fla.1973) (leaf was wilted, dirty); Grizzard v. Colonial Stores, Inc., 330 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976) (substance was thawed frozen orange juice, indicating time enough to thaw).
Therefore, because the record is completely devoid of any evidence, either direct or circumstantial, directed to Eastern’s notice of the dangerous condition, no negligence was shown and summary judgment was proper. AFFIRMED.
SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Newalk v. Fla. Supermarkets, Inc., 610 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…condition or that the condition existed for such a length of time that in the exercise of ordinary care the owners should have known of it and taken action to remedy it or to guard the plaintiff from harm therefrom. Evens v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 468 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. 1st DCA1985); Nance v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., 436 So. 2d 1075, 1076 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 447 So. 2d 889 (Fla.1984). The latter standard, known as constructive notice, may be proven by circumstantial evidence. Nance; Camina v. P…
-
Grimes v. Fam. Dollar Stores OF Fla., Inc., 194 So. 3d 424 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…831, 834 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). A defendant owner or occupant may be held liable for injuries if the dangerous condition existed for a sufficient length of time to charge the defendant with constructive knowledge. See Evens v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc., 468 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Guenther, 395 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Constructive knowledge may be inferred if a dangerous condition existed for such a length of time that in the exercise of rea [*428] sonable care the condit…
-
Cooney v. Jacksonville Transp. Auth., 530 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…f marketable title, Prestige Pontiac still was not the beneficial owner of the car. See generally, Cox Motor Co., supra. A summary judgment may be entered when there is no disputed issue as to the material facts. See Evens v. Eastern Air Lines Inc., 468 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Since the undisputed facts establish that Prestige Pontiac is not liable in these actions, summary judgment was appropriate. The order appealed is affirmed. ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Food Fair Stores OF Fla., Inc. v. Patty, 109 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1959)
- Montgomery v. Fla. Jitney Jungle Stores, Inc., 281 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 1973)
- Anne E. Nance v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., 436 So. 2d 1075 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Gordon v. Gordon, 417 So. 2d 1093 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Grizzard v. Colonial Stores, Inc., 330 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)