ESTELLE GUYTON BUSH, APPELLANT,
v.
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 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 court held that a genuine issue of fact exists regarding the city's duty to maintain the sidewalk where the plaintiff fell.
Plaintiff fell on a steel stump on a sidewalk adjacent to a state road. The stump was the remnant of a severed signpost. The city moved for summary ju…
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.
Plaintiff appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant, the City of Miami, in a negligence action.
The suit was commenced when plaintiff filed her complaint seeking recovery for injuries sustained when she tripped and fell over a jagged steel stump located on the sidewalk running parallel to northwest 36th Street, Miami, Florida. Northwest 36th Street is a part of the State Road System and is known as State Road 25. The stump was the remaining portion of a signpost which had been severed a few inches from the base as a result of an automobile accident which occurred some few weeks prior to plaintiff’s fall.
The point on appeal is whether there exists a genuine issue of fact as to whether the defendant city is under a duty to maintain the sidewalk in question. We think such issue does exist and reverse.
There is a presumption that a sidewalk constructed in a populous part of a city was either built by or is controlled by the city.1 And, where a city does maintain a sidewalk, tire fact that the sidewalk is adjacent to a state road does not relieve a city of its duty of maintenance.2
*821The evidence adduced in support of defendant’s motion for summary judgment did not sufficiently show that the defendant did not maintain the sidewalk. Moreover, if defendant did not maintain the particular portion of the sidewalk where plaintiff fell, this would not necessarily relieve the defendant of its responsibility of maintaining it. Such a duty could exist if defendant has maintained other portions of the sidewalk adjacent to and running parallel with the road in question, and located within the defendant’s municipal limits.
The case is therefore reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
City OF S. Miami & Dade Cnty. v. Pytel, 412 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…owever, that there was a piece of metal protruding from the sidewalk at the time and place of Mr. Pytel’s fall. The City of South Miami does not deny that it had a duty to maintain the sidewalk upon which Mr. Pytel fell. See Bush v. City of Miami, 175 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965). However, the City urges that the issue of proximate cause should not have gone to the jury since there was no direct testimony that Mr. Pytel in fact tripped over the piece of metal piping. This clearly is not the law. Roach v. R…
-
Artesiano v. City OF Coral Gables, 364 So. 2d 536 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…ngs based on the authority of Woods v. City of Palatka, 63 So. 2d 636 (Fla.1953); Schutzer v. City of Miami, 105 So. 2d 492, 493 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958); See also Beattie v. City of Coral Gables, 358 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Bush v. City of Miami, 175 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); City of Miami v. Altman, 128 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961).…
-
Broward Cnty. v. City OF Sunrise, 805 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…ty to be sufficient to overcome the statutory scheme. Furthermore, the City has presented no evidence to rebut the presumption of responsibility based on the mere fact that the sidewalk is located within the municipality. See Bush v. City of Miami, 175 So. 2d 820 (1965)(holding that “there is a presumption that a sidewalk constructed in a populous part of a city was either built by or is controlled by the city”). In fact, the evidence suggests that the City built the sidewalk, as it was constructed during th…
Authorities Cited
- Singleton v. City OF Jacksonville, 107 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)
- City OF Miami v. Mulholland, 158 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)