MARIA NUNEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA, 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 trial court erred in granting a directed verdict for the defendant after a jury found in favor of the plaintiff.
Plaintiff sustained injuries at a county park and sued the county for breach of its duty to maintain the premises safely. A jury found in her favor, b…
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 Maintain Premises In Reasonably Safe Condition cases and more on FLexlaw
BLUE, Acting Chief Judge.
Maria Nunez, plaintiff below, appeals a directed verdict granted to Lee County, defendant below, following a jury verdict in her favor. Mrs. Nunez sued Lee County for injuries she sustained at a Lee County park; she alleged, and the jury found, that Lee County breached its duty to maintain the premises in a safe condition. Because the trial court erred in directing a verdict, we reverse and remand for reinstatement of the jury verdict.
A trial court may direct a verdict only when the evidence and reasonable inferences therefrom fail to prove the plaintiffs case. See Hartnett v. Fowler, 94 So. 2d 724 (Fla.1957). This standard is applied on appeal when reviewing a trial court’s ruling on a motion for directed verdict. See Reams v. Vaughn, 435 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). “Florida law cautions against a motion for directed verdict in negligence cases since the evidence to support the elements of negligence are frequently subject to more than one interpretation.” Regency Lake Apartments Assocs., Ltd. v. French, 590 So. 2d 970, 972 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
Based on our review of the record, we conclude that the trial court erred in granting the motion for directed verdict because Mrs. Nunez presented sufficient evidence to prove her claim that Lee County breached its duty to use reasonable care in maintaining the premises in a reasonably safe condition. See Butler v. Sarasota County, 501 So. 2d 579, 579 (Fla.1986) (holding that a governmental body has the discretionary authority to decide whether to operate a facility, but once it decides to do so, “it assumes the common law duty to operate the facility safely, just as a private individual is obligated under like circumstances”) (quoting Avallone v. Board of County Comm’rs, 493 So. 2d 1002, 1005 (Fla.1986)). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for reinstatement of the jury verdict.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
WHATLEY and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Sims v. Cristinzio, 898 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…to the jury. [*1006] Marriott Int’l, 855 So. 2d at 628. The standard of review on appeal of the trial court’s ruling on a defendant’s motion for directed verdict is the same test used by the trial court in ruling on the motion. Nunez v. Lee County, 777 So. 2d 1016, 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Reams, 435 So. 2d at 880. Thus, while the facts relating to the alleged negligence of Fortner and Curtis are in dispute, for the purposes of reviewing the propriety of the directed verdicts in this case, we have resolved th…
-
Marriott Int'l, Inc. v. Zaira Perez-Melendez, 855 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…the court pointed out that “[w]hat is and what is not reasonable care under the circumstances is, as a general rule, simply undeterminable as a matter of law.” . Scott; Blake v. Hi Lu Corp., 781 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Nunez v. Lee County, 777 So. 2d 1016, 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) ("Florida law cautions against a motion for directed verdict in negligence cases, since the evidence to support the elements of negligence are frequently subject to more than one interpretation.”) (quoting Regency Lake Apart…
-
Jalayna Jones Etheredge and Valerie A. Vana v. Walt Disney World Co., 999 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…ns should be treated with special caution because it is the function of the jury to weigh and evaluate the evidence. Scott, 798 So. 2d at 909 (citing Jacobs v. Westgate, 766 [*672] So. 2d 1175, 1179 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)), see also Nunez v. Lee County, 777 So. 2d 1016, 1016 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) (“Florida law cautions against a motion for directed verdict in negligence cases since the evidence to support the elements of negligence are frequently subject to more than one interpretation”) (quoting Regency Lake Apartme…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Avallone v. Bd. OF Cnty. Comm'rs OF Citrus Cnty., 493 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 1986)
- Hartnett v. Fowler, 94 So. 2d 724 (Fla. 1957)
- Regency Lake Apts. Assocs., Ltd. v. French, 590 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Reams v. Blanche Vaughn and Herman Vaughn, 435 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Butler v. Sarasota Cnty., 501 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 1986)