TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, AS SUBROGEE OF TERRANCE MCWILLIAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, 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.
An insurance company sued Miami-Dade County as subrogee of a boat owner whose vessel was destroyed by fire at a county-leased marina. The court reversed summary judgment, holding that the county, as marina lessor, owed a common law duty of reasonable care that may include providing functional fire-suppression equipment, and that the county failed to conclusively establish it had not negligently maintained the equipment or that its conduct was not a legal cause of the loss.
The county owed a common law duty to exercise reasonable care for those lawfully on its premises, which may include providing means to extinguish fires. The county failed to meet its burden of conclusively establishing either that it had not negligently maintained its fire equipment or that its conduct was not a legal cause of the loss, and therefore summary judgment was improper.
[1] A landowner has a common law duty to exercise reasonable care for the safety of those lawfully upon the premises.
[2] A landowner's duty of reasonable care may include providing means to extinguish fires that have already started.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“having undertaken the role of the landowner-lessor of the marina, the county was obliged to discharge the common law duty of exercising reasonable care for those lawfully upon the premises”
Establishes the primary basis for the county's liability—that operating a marina imposes a common law duty of care on the county as a landowner.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA boat docked at a county-owned and leased marina caught fire after coming into contact with another vessel that had exploded while being fueled. When…
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 Governmental Function Immunity cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
The plaintiff-appellant insurance company sues as the subrogee of the owner of a boat docked at a marina owned and leased by the defendant-appellee Dade County. The vessel burned to the water line after it came in contact with another which had caught fire in an explosion while being fueled. The sole presently-asserted basis for the county’s liability1 lies in the fact that when attempts were made to extinguish the original fire with a hose and water pump provided at dockside by the county, no water whatever was available allegedly because of defects in the water pressure, the attendant equipment, or both. The insurer-subrogee suffered a summary judgment below which we now reverse.
It is clear that having undertaken the role of the landowner-lessor of the marina, the county was obliged to discharge the common law duty of exercising reasonable care for those lawfully upon the premises. Avallone v. Board of County Commissioners of Citrus County, 493 So. 2d 1002, 1005 (Fla.1986) (“once the unit decides to operate the swimming facility, it assumes the common law duty to operate the facility safely, just as a private individual is obligated under like circumstances”)
; Butler v. Sarasota County, 501 So. 2d 579 (Fla.1986). This duty may include one of providing means, as asserted here, of extinguishing already-and-non-negligently started fires. Weis-Patterson Lumber Co. v. King, 131 Fla. 342, 177 So. 313 (1937); Bush v. Dania, 121 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960). Since we find that the county did not satisfy its burden of conclusively establishing either that it had not negligently maintained its fire equipment or that its conduct was not a legal cause of the loss, the summary judgment cannot stand. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966).
Reversed.
. Other grounds raised in the complaint have been abandoned.
. We cite Avallone only for this "second" holding since there is no evidence that the county had purchased liability insurance pursuant to section 286.28, Florida Statutes (1985).
Furthermore, we reject the plaintiff-appellant’s argument that the county may be liable for failing properly to fight fires because, as a matter of fulfilling one of its governmental functions, it has undertaken to do so. City of Daytona Beach v. Palmer, 469 So. 2d 121 (Fla.1985).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pollock v. Fla. Dep't OF Hwy. Patrol, 882 So. 2d 928 (Fla. 2004)…2d 696, 698 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (holding that the city had a nondelegable duty to maintain its roads, sidewalks, and rights-of-way in a reasonably safe condition even where a third party created the defect); Travelers Ins. Co. v. Metro. Dade County, 510 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (ascribing duty of care to the county as the landowner-lessor of a marina); Wojtan v. Hernando County, 379 So. 2d 198, 199 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (recognizing county’s responsi [*934] bility as a landowner to free streets and sidewal…
-
Fletcher Slemp and Dora Slemp v. City OF N. Miami, 515 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…ity had done nothing at all, the Slemps would have been in any different position, I thoroughly agree with Judge Hendry’s comprehensive opinion that there was no breach of a legally cognizable “duty.” See also McWilliams v. Metropolitan Dade County, 510 So. 2d 1240 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); City of [*357] Daytona Beach v. Palmer, 469 So. 2d 121 (Fla.1985). BARKDULL, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ., concur. . Of course, if one is injured by affirmative misfeasance by the government, as when he is struck by…
Authorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Avallone v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Citrus Cnty., 493 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 1986)
- City OF Daytona Beach v. Palmer, 469 So. 2d 121 (Fla. 1985)
- Butler v. Sarasota Cnty., 501 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 1986)
- Weis-Patterson Lumber Co. v. King, 131 Fla. 342 (Fla. 1937)
- Jerles Inv. Co., Inc. v. Wells, 130 Fla. 136 (Fla. 1937)
- Bush v. City OF Dania, 121 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)