DIANE DOERING, APPELLANT,
v.
THE VILLAGES OPERATING COMPANY, 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.
Diane Doering appeals a summary judgment in favor of The Villages Operating Company after she tripped on a raised wooden plank on the defendant's deck during a Mardi Gras festival and broke her femur. The court reverses, finding disputed questions of material fact regarding whether the dangerous condition was a common design element or the result of poor maintenance, precluding summary judgment.
Summary judgment was improper because genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether the cause of Appellant's fall was a common design element or the result of poor maintenance. The obvious danger doctrine does not apply when negligence is predicated on breach of the duty to maintain premises in a reasonably safe condition.
[1] Summary judgment must be reversed if disputed issues of material fact exist in the record.
[2] A genuine issue of material fact exists when conflicting evidence is presented regarding the cause of a fall on a deck.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“the obvious danger doctrine does not apply when negligence is predicated on breach of the duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition”
Establishes that even if a hazard is obvious, the defendant may still be liable for failure to maintain safe premises
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Doering tripped over a raised wooden plank on a large wooden deck owned by The Villages during a well-attended Mardi Gras festival and broke…
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
Appellant, Diane Doering, timely appeals the trial court’s summary final judgment in favor of Appellee, The Villages Operating Company (“The Villages”). Because we find there are disputed questions of material fact to be determined by a fact finder, we reverse.
While walking on a large wharf — like wooden deck owned by The Villages during a well-attended Mardi Gras festival, Appellant tripped over a raised wooden plank and suffered a broken left femur.
*418She claimed The Villages breached its duty to warn her of the dangerous condition and its duty to maintain the deck at all times in a reasonably safe condition. The Villages claimed that the cause of the fall was a common design element, not the result of poor maintenance. In addition, The Villages claimed by an affirmative defense that the condition was an open and obvious condition and therefore no duty was breached. The trial court agreed with The Villages and granted summary judgment.
A trial court’s decision to grant final summary judgment is reviewed de novo. If this court finds the lack of any genuine material issue of fact, summary judgment should be affirmed. If it appears in the record that there are disputed issues of material fact, summary judgment must be reversed. Lawrence v. Pep Boys Manny Moe & Jack, Inc., 842 So.2d 308 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003).
The Villages asserts that the deck Appellant was walking on was “not designed to be a flat surface” and included “boards that were rough and uneven to accomplish the wharf theme aesthetic.” We do not find evidence to support this assertion, but even if such evidence exists, conflicting evidence was presented that the end of the board in question was in very bad condition — completely rotted and warped upward between one-half inch and one and one-half inches above the deck’s surface. The Villages’ representative was aware, that wooden deck boards could rot and warp over time, creating a tripping hazard. Additional evidence was presented that the board constituted a building code violation because any elevation changes over a quarter inch were required to be beveled. Thus, a genuine issue of fact existed as to whether the cause of Appellant’s fall was a common design element or the result of poor maintenance. See, e.g., Aaron v. Palatka Mall, L.L.C., 908 So.2d 574, 577 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (noting that the “obvious danger doctrine does not apply when negligence is predicated on breach of the duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition”).1
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
PALMER and WALLIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dudowicz v. The Pearl on 63 Main, Ltd., 326 So. 3d 715 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…use it is undisputed that the unbeveled change in the hotel room’s floor level was 3/8 of an inch, Appellant provided evidence of a building code violation, which constituted prima facie evidence of negligence. See Doering v. Villages Operating Co., 153 So. 3d 417, 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (determining that evidence of a building code violation, i.e., failure to bevel any elevation changes over a quarter inch, could be used to support plaintiff’s claim that defendant’s property was not maintained in a reasonab…
-
Reina I. Echevarria and Jorge Echevarria v. Lennar Homes, LLC, 306 So. 3d 327 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)…DCA 2019) (finding an expert’s claim that a “manhole was raised and elevated higher than permitted by the Broward County Code” created an issue of material fact as to whether the manhole was a dangerous condition); Doering v. Villages Operating Co., 153 So. 3d 417, 418 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (determining evidence of a building code violation could be used to support a claim that property was not maintained in a reasonably safe condition). III. CONCLUSION Because there is a disputed issue of material fact as to…
-
Sutley v. The Ocean Trillium Suites, Inc. (Fla. 5th DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Aaron v. Palatka Mall, L.L.C., 908 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)