MICHAEL FITZGERALD, LYNN FITZGERALD, PHILIP FITZGERALD, DOROTHY ELLIOTT, HOWARD GITLAN AND BARBARA GITLAN, APPELLANTS,

v.

WESTINGHOUSE CREDIT CORPORATION, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Derrick & Assocs. Pathology, P.A. v. Gary V. Kuehl, M.D., 617 So. 2d 866 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)
  …m non-conveniens” statute. Counts three and four, if filed alone, would have to be brought in Palm Beach County because that is where both torts allegedly “arose” or took place and the defendant resides.6 See Fitzgerald v. Westinghouse Credit Corp., 498 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). And there was a strong showing in this case that numerous witnesses reside in Palm Beach County, and considerable documentary evidence is located there. The trial judge found that, for the convenience of the parties and the cou…
• Sec. Bureau, Inc. v. Alvarez, 654 So. 2d 1024 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
  …s not sufficient to make the injury compensable under this exception to the premises rule. The Florida Supreme Court held that the injury was not compensa-ble, and was precluded under the going and coming rule. In contrast, in Maas Brothers v. Peo, 498 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) a different fact situation led to the opposite result. As in El Sirocco Motor Inn, Inc. v. Prekop, the employer in Maas Brothers v. Peo neither leased, owned nor maintained the parking lot. Parking spaces near the store entrances…
• Kash-N-Karry & Scott Wetzel Servs., Inc. v. Johnson, 617 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
  …aranja Rock Company, supra. A chalk line into which a claimant caught the heel of her shoe, a rough and uneven portion of a sidewalk, and a pothole at the entrance of a driveway have been recognized as possible special hazards. Maas Brothers v. Peo, 498 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Clark, supra at 661-666; Petroske, supra at 857. The instant “no parking” instruction, painted at the base of [*794] the curb of a shopping plaza, cannot as a matter of law be considered a special hazard, because the record is d…