ROBERTA KERSUL AND RICHARD KERSUL, HER HUSBAND, APPELLANTS,
v.
BOCA RATON COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, 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.
The court reversed summary judgment for a hospital in a slip-and-fall case, holding that even if a sidewalk defect is open and obvious, the hospital's duty to maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition remains, and genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment.
A landowner's duty to maintain property in a reasonably safe condition is not discharged merely because a hazard is open and obvious, and summary judgment is improper when evidence suggests the danger was not open and obvious and the landowner had notice of the condition.
[1] A landowner's duty to maintain property in a reasonably safe condition is distinct from and not discharged by the open and obvious nature of a hazard, which may only disc…
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 intelligence“Some conditions are simply so open and obvious, so common and so ordinarily innocuous, that they can be held as a matter of law to not constitute a hidden dangerous condition.”
The hospital cited this principle from Circle K to argue it had no duty to warn, but the court distinguished between the duty to warn and the duty to maintain.
Roberta Kersul slipped and fell on an uneven sidewalk at Boca Raton Community Hospital caused by an uneven joint between two concrete segments.…
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 Open And Obvious Danger cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse a summary judgment entered against Plaintiffs because there are genuine issues of material fact in this case. Plaintiffs sued Boca Raton Community Hospital after Roberta. Kersul slipped and fell on an uneven sidewalk. The hospital argued that it had no duty to warn because the uneven joint between the two concrete segments was an open and obvious danger. See Circle K Convenience Stores, Inc. v. Ferguson, 556 So. 2d 1207, 1208 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990) (“Some conditions are simply so open and obvious, so common and so ordinarily innocuous, that they can be held as a matter of law to not constitute a hidden dangerous condition.”). However, although the open and obvious nature of a hazard may discharge a landowner’s duty to warn, it does not discharge the duty to maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition. See Lotto v. Point East Two Condominium Corp., 702 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).
Further, Plaintiffs presented evidence that the danger was not open and obvious and that the hospital may have had notice of the dangerous condition through a prior incident. This is sufficient to overcome a motion for summary judgment. We, therefore, reverse and remand for further proceedings.
STONE, C.J., and FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Aaron v. Palatka Mall, L.L.C., 908 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…ertain circumstances discharge the duty to warn, it does not discharge the landowner’s duty to maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition. Knight v. Waltman, 774 [*578] So. 2d 731 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Kersul v. Boca Raton Cmty. Hosp., Inc., 711 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Regency Lake Apartments Assocs., Ltd. v. French, 590 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Hogan v. Chupka, 579 So. 2d 395, 396 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Pittman v. Volusia County, 380 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). In Pittman, this court…
-
Marriott Int'l, Inc. v. Zaira Perez-Melendez, 855 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…ay in certain circumstances discharge the duty to warn, it does not discharge the landowner’s duty to maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition. Knight v. Waltman, 774 So. 2d 731 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Kersul v. Boca Raton Cmty. Hosp., Inc., 711 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Regency Lake Apartments Assocs., Ltd. v. French, 590 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Hogan v. Chupka, 579 So. 2d 395, 396 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Pittman v. Volusia County, 380 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). In Pittman, this court…
-
Gillian Fieldhouse v. TAM Inv. Co., 959 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…e have previously explained, “although the open and obvious nature of a hazard may discharge a landowner’s duty to warn, it does not discharge the duty to maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition.” Kersul v. Boca Raton Cmty. Hosp., Inc., 711 So. 2d 234, 234 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). “A plaintiffs knowledge of a dangerous condition ... simply raises the issue of comparative negligence and precludes summary judgment.” Fenster, 785 So. 2d at 739. Moreover, “the burden is upon the party moving for summary…
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
- Circle K Convenience Stores, Inc. v. Ferguson, 556 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Lotto v. Point E. TWO Condo. Corp., Inc., 702 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)