VERA YUNITER, APPELLANT,
v.
A & A EDGEWATER OF FLORIDA, INC., A FLORIDA 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.
Vera Yuniter appeals the grant of summary judgment in her negligence action against a motel after she was injured when a chair leg broke while she was sitting in it. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that questions about whether the motel's inspection was reasonable and whether Yuniter could have discovered the defect through due care present genuine issues of fact for a jury.
The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because whether the motel's inspection was reasonable is a question for the jury to determine, and the pleadings reveal genuine issues of fact regarding both the adequacy of inspection and whether Yuniter could have discovered the danger through the exercise of due care.
[1] A business owner owes a business invitee the duty to use reasonable care in maintaining the premises in a reasonably safe condition.
[2] A business owner owes a business invitee the duty to warn of concealed perils that the owner knows or should know, and that are unknown to the invitee and cannot be disco…
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“As a registered guest, Yuniter was a business invitee of the motel. As such, she was owed two duties by the motel: "(1) to use reasonable care in maintaining the premises in a reasonably safe condition; and (2) to give the invitee warning of concealed perils which are or should be known to the landowner, and which are unknown to the invitee and cannot be discovered by him through the exercise of due care."”
Establishes the legal standard for the motel's duties to Yuniter as a business invitee
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceYuniter rented a room at the motel for an extended period. After more than a week into her stay, she attempted to stand using the chair's arms as supp…
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 Duty To Warn Of Concealed Perils cases and more on FLexlaw
WHATLEY, Judge.
Vera Yuniter appeals the entry of summary judgment in favor of A & A Edgewater of Florida, Inc. (the motel). We reverse.
Yuniter rented a room at the motel for an extended period. Over a week into her stay, Yuniter had an accident in her room. She attempted to stand from the chair in which she was sitting, using the chair’s arms as support, and the right leg of the chair apparently broke, causing Yuniter to fall to the floor. As a result, Yuniter filed a negligence action against the motel alleging that she suffered injuries in this accident due to the motel’s negligent inspection and/or maintenance of the chair and its failure to repair the chair or warn of its condition. Yuniter also alleged she was unaware of-any danger in using the chair. The motel moved for summary judgment contending it was not put on reasonable notice that the chair posed any danger to Yuniter, and therefore, it had no duty to warn of a dangerous condition. In support of its motion, the motel filed a memorandum of law asserting the reasonableness of its inspection of the chair and the lack of any notice from Yuniter of a defect in the chair. With regard to the motel’s inspection, the documentation submitted with the memorandum of law showed that, due to the small size of Yuniter’s room, the cleaning personnel would turn the chair in question upside down on the bed in order to vacuum. The chair’s legs were dusted in this upside down position. No defect was observed. Further, the motel contended that approximately six weeks before the accident, one of its owners had inspected the chair and found no defect. The chair had been moved from another room to Yuniter’s room before her arrival. The motel had purchased the chair some years before at a used furniture store.
As a registered guest, Yuniter was a business invitee of the motel. See Steinberg v. Irwin Operating Co., 90 So. 2d 460 (Fla.1956). As such, she was owed two duties by the motel: “(1) to use reasonable care in maintaining the premises in a reasonably safe condition; and (2) to give the invitee warning of concealed perils which are or should be known to the landowner, and which are unknown to the invitee and cannot be discovered by him through the exercise of due care.” Emmons v. Baptist Hosp., 478 So. 2d 440, 442 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). These duties do not involve insuring the safety of business invitees, or exercising more than ordinary care. Id.
In fulfilling the first duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition, landowners must conduct inspections appropriate for the premises involved. “Generally questions concerning whether a proper inspection, if made, would have revealed alleged defects are considered genuine triable issues.” Black v. Heininger, 163 So. 2d 3, 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964).
Thus, summary judgment was inappropriate because whether the motel’s inspection of the chair was reasonable was for a jury to determine. In addition, the pleadings reveal a genuine issue of fact of whether Yuniter could have discovered the danger the chair posed through the exercise of due care.
The motel also postures that because Yuniter was in the room for more than a week before the chair collapsed, she was in a superior position to discover any alleged defect. This is an appropriate argument to submit to the trier of fact, but not to use to prevail on summary judgment.
Accordingly, we reverse the entry of summary judgment in favor of A & A Edgewater of Florida, Inc., and remand for reinstatement of Yuniter’s complaint.
Reversed and remanded.
PATTERSON, A.C.J., and BLUE, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Friedrich v. Fetterman & Assocs., P.A., 137 So. 3d 362 (Fla. 2013)…d have revealed the defect was a question for the jury given that it could be inferred that the chair was defective since it was brand new and “fail[ed] to bear the weight of its first user.” Likewise, in Yuniter v. A & A Edgewater of Florida, Inc., 707 So. 2d 763, 764 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), the district court held that “whether the motel’s inspection of the chair was reasonable was for a jury to determine” and noted that there was a “genuine issue of fact [as to] whether [the guest] could have discovered the da…1 / 2
-
Fetterman & Assocs., P.A. v. Friedrich, 69 So. 3d 965 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)…angers that the owner knows or should know about, which are unknown to the invitee and cannot be discovered by the invitee through due care.” Morales v. Weil, 44 So. 3d 173, 178 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); see also Yuniter v. A & A Edgewater of Fla., Inc., 707 So. 2d 763, 764 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). In Yuniter, a hotel guest attempted to stand on a chair when the leg broke, causing injury to the guest. In reversing the order granting summary judgment in favor of the hotel, the appellate court found that “[generally ques…
-
Michael J. Kinney, M.D. v. R.H. Halt Assocs., Inc., 826 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…substance that caused him to fall. We disagree. Tandem, as owner of the building, had a duty to Kinney, a business invitee, to use reasonable care to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition. Yuniter v. A & A Edgewater of Florida, Inc., 707 So. 2d 763 (Fla. 2d DCA [*330] 1998). There was ample evidence in the record from which a jury could conclude that Tandem had breached its duty to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition. Several witnesses testified that the stairs were covered wi…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Emmons v. Baptist Hosp. & Servicemaster Indus., Inc., 478 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Helms v. Kelly, 163 So. 2d 3 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Essie Steinberg and Louis Steinberg v. Irwin Operating Co., 90 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 1956)