LULU REDDICK

v.

STATE

Citator

Cited By

• Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Johstoneaux, 395 So. 2d 599 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
  …96 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).4 Affirmed. HENDRY, J., dissents. . There is no question of the defendant’s duty at the location where the injury took place. See, Shields v. Food Fair Stores of Florida, Inc., 106 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958), cert. denied, 109 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 1959). . It was described as such by a policeman who patrolled the locality. .Although the store had a guard on duty during the evening hours, the incident in question occurred at around 11:00 a. m. when none was present. It was clearly a ju…
• Molinares v. EL Centro Gallego, Inc., 545 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
  …uty extends to providing a reasonably safe method of egress and ingress for business invitees. Marhefka v. Monte Carlo Management Corp., 358 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Shields v. Food Fair Stores, 106 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958), cert. denied, 109 So. 2d 168 (Fla.1959). In Schatz, the first district ruled that, as a matter of law, it was unforeseeable that an automobile parked in a marked stall would move forward, over a sidewalk and into a store, and injure a patron inside the store. The Schatz scenari…
• Reed v. Ingham, 125 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)
  …and concurrence, [*304] use the parking area as an approach to the other facilities operated in conjunction therewith.” (Emphasis added.) The court, in Shields v. Food Fair Stores of Florida, Fla.App.1958, 106 So. 2d 90, 92, certiorari denied Fla., 109 So. 2d 168, in stating the standard of care owed to invitees by an occupier of premises, said the following: “The duty owed to invitees by an occupier of premises to maintain them in a reasonably safe condition includes and extends to approaches to the premis…

Authorities Cited

• Reddick v. State, 104 So. 2d 413 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)