EDA A. PEREZ-RIOS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE GRAHAM COMPANIES, 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.
In this slip-and-fall case, the court affirmed summary judgment in favor of a building owner where the plaintiff tripped on a plainly visible four-inch step. The plaintiff failed to identify any actual defect in the step or present evidence of dangerous conditions, making summary judgment appropriate as a matter of law.
Summary judgment was properly entered because the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence of any defect in the step or dangerous condition, and the step was plainly visible as a matter of law, making it an obvious condition for which the owner had no duty to warn.
[1] A property owner is not required to warn an invitee of dangers that are open and obvious.
[2] Summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence presented is insufficient to justify a trial.
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“Summary judgment is designed to test the sufficiency of the evidence to determine if there is sufficient evidence at issue to justify a trial or formal hearing on the issues raised in the pleadings.”
Establishes the purpose and standard for summary judgment in Florida law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMs. Perez-Rios tripped on a four-inch high step leading from a red brick pavement to a building owned by The Graham Companies on a clear day. The step…
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 Slip And Fall Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
In this slip-and-fall case, .Eda A. Perez-Rios, the plaintiff below, appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of The Graham Companies. At her deposi*479tion, Ms. Perez-Rios indicated that, on the morning of a clear day, she tripped on a four-inch high step leading from the pavement to a building owned by The Graham Companies. The step was plainly visible. The pavement above and below the step was constructed of red brick. In contrast, the step was constructed of white stone. Photographs of the area where she fell, which she-authenticated, indicated no particular defect. There was no evidence, of a foreign object on’ the step, uneven wear and tear, inadequate lighting, or wet or slippery conditions. When directly asked, Ms. Perez-Rios could not identify any defects in the step. No contradictory evidence, such as an expert’s report,' was submitted into the record which might have created a disputed issue of fact regarding any defect in the step which could be resolved only by a jury or judge sitting as a fact-finder.
Under these circumstancés, the trial court properly entered summary judgment against Ms. Perez-Rios. “Summary.judgment is designed to test the sufficiency of the evidence to determine if there is sufficient evidence at issue to justify a trial or formal hearing on the issues raised in the pleadings.” Fla. Bar v. Greene, 926 So.2d 1195, 1200 (Fla.2006). “A party should not be put to the expense of going.through a trial, where the only possible result will be a directed verdict.” Martin Petroleum Corp. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 769 So.2d 1105, 1108 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). See also Aventura Mall Venture v. Olson, 561 So.2d 319, 320 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (“An owner is entitled to assume that the invitee will perceive that which would be obvious to him [or her] upon the ordinary use, of his own sense[s], and is not required to give the invitee notice or warning of an obvious danger.”) (citation omitted); 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.”).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Yosvani Gonzalez and Yenisleidy Perez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 273 So. 3d 1031 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…fact." Perez-Gurri Corp. v. McLeod, 238 So. 3d 347, 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017). On the other hand, a "party should not be put to the expense of going through a trial, where the only possible result will be a directed verdict." Perez-Rios v. Graham Cos., 183 So. 3d 478, 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (quoting Martin Petroleum Corp. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 769 So. 2d 1105, 1108 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) ). We hold that the two affidavits submitted by Citizens were sufficient to meet its burden as movant for summary judgment. It…
-
Perez-Gurri Corp. v. McLeod, 238 So. 3d 347 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…sues raised in the pleadings." The Fla. Bar v. Greene, 926 So. 2d 1195, 1200 (Fla. 2006). "A party should not be put to the expense of going through a trial, where the only possible result will be a directed verdict." Perez-Rios v. Graham Companies, 183 So. 3d 478, 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (quoting Martin Petroleum Corp. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 769 So. 2d 1105, 1108 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) ). Because summary judgment tests the sufficiency of the evidence to justify a trial, it "is proper only if, taking the evidence…
-
Cascar, LLC v. City OF Coral Gables, 274 So. 3d 1231 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Greene, 926 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 2006)
- Circle K Convenience Stores, Inc. v. Ferguson, 556 So. 2d 1207 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Aventura Mall Venture v. Olson, 561 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Martin Petroleum Corp. v. Amerada Hess Corp., 769 So. 2d 1105 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)