LEROY POSS, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Kuehner v. Green, 436 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 1983)
  …estions must be answered. First, the jury must decide whether the plaintiff subjectively appreciated the risk giving rise to the injury. Henry v. Britt, 220 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 229 So. 2d 867 (Fla.1969); see also Dana v. Bursey, 169 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964), (actual knowledge is essential to voluntary assumption of risk). In making this determination it is well within the province of the jury to consider all the evidence as to what the plaintiff really expected while participating in…
• Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. & Robert J. Schmidt v. Art A. Magnuson, 288 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)
  …he danger, and thereafter, with a reasonable opportunity to avoid it, a voluntary and deliberate exposure to such danger. Cleveland v. City of Miami, Fla.1972, 263 So. 2d 573; Bartholf v. Baker, Fla.1954, 71 So. 2d 480; Dana v. Bursey, Fla.App.1964, 169 So. 2d 845. The answer to the complaint did not adequately allege these essentials and thus, the court did not err in refusing to amend the pretrial order so as to include such defense as one of the issues to be tried (Point I). It necessarily follows that the…
• Henry v. Duncan E. Britt, 220 So. 2d 917 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)
  …be kept in mind that voluntary exposure is the bedrock upon which the doctrine of assumed risk rests. Bartholf v. Baker, Fla.1954, 71 So. 2d 480. There must be actual knowledge of the condition which creates the peril. Dana v. Bursey, Fla.App.1964, 169 So. 2d 845, and there must be appreciation of the danger, at the time one voluntarily exposes himself to such risk. A subjective standard applies. Jones v. Crews, Fla.App.1967, 204 So. 2d 24. There was not the slightest bit of evidence that Gary had actual kno…

Authorities Cited

• Sardinia v. State, 162 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)