MELVINA ROGERS, APPELLANT,
v.
SYDNEY BESTHOFF, D/B/A K & B DRUGS, 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.
Summary judgment for defendant drug store was proper because plaintiff's deposition testimony failed to establish that the store created, knew of, or should have known of the hazardous condition that caused her fall.
A store is not liable for a slip-and-fall injury when the plaintiff cannot prove the store created the hazard, knew of it, or should have known of it based on the length of time it existed.
[1] In a negligence action against a store for a slip-and-fall injury, the plaintiff must prove that the store created the hazardous condition, knew of its existence, or shou…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMelvina Rogers fell in a K & B Drugs store and sued for negligence against the store owner Sydney Besthoff.…
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 Negligence Action cases and more on FLexlaw
BARFIELD, Judge.
The plaintiffs deposition testimony demonstrates that she cannot prove an element necessary to succeed in her negligence action against the drug store: that the hazardous condition which caused her fall was created by a store employee, or that the store knew of the existence of the hazardous condition, or that the hazardous condition had existed for a sufficient length of time prior to her fall that the store should have known of its existence. Summary judgment was therefore proper. See Food Fair Stores of Florida, Inc. v. Patty, 109 So. 2d 5 (Fla.1959); Connolly v. Sebeco, Inc., 89 So. 2d 482 (Fla.1956); Schaap v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc., 579 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). See also Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966); Harvey Bldg., Inc. v. Haley, 175 So. 2d 780 (Fla.1965); Food Fair Stores v. Trusell, 131 So. 2d 730 (Fla.1961); Broz v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 546 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Haynes v. Lloyd, 533 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Smith v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., 528 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Bates v. Winn-Dixie Supermarkets, Inc., 182 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 2d DCA), certiorari denied, 188 So. 2d 813 (Fla.1966); Sammons v. Food Fair Stores of Florida, Inc., 118 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960).
AFFIRMED.
MINER and WOLF, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited (14 total)
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Connolly v. Sebeco, Inc., 89 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 1956)
- Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Phoebe C. Trusell et vir, 131 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 1961)
- Food Fair Stores OF Fla., Inc. v. Patty, 109 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1959)
- Holland Paving Co., Inc. v. Dann, 175 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 1965)
- Harvey Bldg., Inc. v. Ocie M. Haley, 175 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 1965)
- Schaap v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc., 579 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Trevino O. Haynes v. L.F. Lloyd, 533 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)
- Bates v. Winn-Dixie Supermarkets, Inc., 182 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
- Broz v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 546 So. 2d 83 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)