WASHINGTON AVENUE FOOD CENTER, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
v.
MAX MODLIN, HUSBAND AND SURVIVING SPOUSE OF CELIA MODLIN, DECEASED, RESPONDENT
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 Florida Supreme Court quashed a decision by the District Court of Appeal, finding a jurisdictional conflict with its prior ruling in Slavin v. Kay. The case was remanded for reconsideration based on the principles established in a related case, Mai Kai, Inc. v. Colucci.
Yes, a jurisdictional conflict of decisions is present. The Court adheres to its decision in Slavin v. Kay.
“Jurisdiction is laid with the contention that the cited decision conflicts with the opinion of this Court in Slavin v. Kay, Fla., 108 So. 2d 462.”
Establishes the basis for the Florida Supreme Court's review.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involves a petition for a writ of certiorari to review a decision by the District Court of Appeal, Third District. The petitioner argued that…
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 Writ Of Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
By petition for a writ of certiorari, we have for review a decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, in Washington Avenue Food Center, Inc. v. Modlin et al., Fla.App., 178 So.2d 596. Jurisdiction is laid with the contention that the cited decision conflicts with the opinion of this Court in Slavin v. Kay, Fla., 108 So.2d 462.
The factual background is adequately delineated in the opinion of the District Court under review. We find that the jurisdictional conflict of decisions is present. In our opinion in Mai Kai, Inc. et al. v. Colucci et al., 205 So.2d 291, opinion filed 29th day of November, 1967, we have announced our adherence to our decision in Slavin v. Kay, supra. On the authority of Mai Kai, Inc., the decision of the District Court now under review is quashed, and the cause is remanded to the District Court of Appeal, Third District, for disposal consistent with this opinion and our opinion in Mai Kai, Inc. v. Colucci, supra.
It is so ordered.
CALDWELL, C. J., and THOMAS, DREW and THORNAL, JJ., concur.
ROBERTS, J., concurs specially with opinion.
ERVIN, J., dissents with opinion.
WHITE, Jos. S., Circuit Judge (Retired) dissents with opinion.
(concurring specially) :
I concur in the judgment for the reasons stated in Hall v. Holland, Fla., 47 So.2d 889 and because the doctrine of implied warranty is not raised.
(dissenting):
I would follow without modification the opinion of .the District Court with respect to the question of the liability of Washington Avenue Food Center, Inc., a Florida corporation. I think the District Court’s opinion appropriately sets forth policy considerations supported by legal precedents which are best attuned to provide a remedy for members of the public who suffer injury in cases of this kind. I refer to the text of its opinion from which headnotes 1 to 6, inclusive, are drawn.
(Retired) (dissenting) :
I respectfully dissent in this case, also, upon grounds stated in dissenting opinion in Mai Kai and Reilly v. Colucci, 205 So.2d 291, filed the 29th day of November, 1967.
ROBERTS, Justice
(concurring specially) :
I concur in the judgment for the reasons stated in Hall v. Holland, Fla., 47 So. 2d 889 and because the doctrine of implied warranty is not raised.
ERVIN, Justice
(dissenting):
I would follow without modification the opinion of .the District Court with respect to the question of the liability of Washington Avenue Food Center, Inc., a Florida corporation. I think the District Court’s opinion appropriately sets forth policy considerations supported by legal precedents which are best attuned to provide a remedy for members of the public who suffer injury in cases of this kind. I refer to the text of its opinion from which headnotes 1 to 6, inclusive, are drawn.
WHITE, Jos. S., Circuit Judge
(Retired) (dissenting) :
I respectfully dissent in this case, also, upon grounds stated in dissenting opinion in Mai Kai and Reilly v. Colucci, 205 So. 2d 291, filed the 29th day of November, 1967.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brien v. 18925 Collins Ave. Corp., 233 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…to see that the security guard service and any employee of that service carry out the tasks of the property owner in a non-negligent manner. Thus appellant, in effect, admits the authority of Washington Avenue Food Center, Inc. v. Modlin, Fla.1968, 205 So. 2d 295; Mai Kai, Inc. v. Colucci, Fla.1968, 205 So. 2d 291; and similar cases for the rule that an owner is not ordinarily liable for the negligence of an independent contractor employed by the owner.2 Appellant urges that security guards authorized to car…
-
MAI KAI, Inc. v. Mary Colucci and her husband, 205 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1967)…bid, p. 466. .Cited in the opinion of the appellate court is Modlin v. Washington Avenue Food Center, Fla.App., 4th Dist. 1965, 178 So. 2d 596, which has been reviewed upon petition for certiorari in this Court. See opinion filed November 29, 1967, 205 So. 2d 295. . Hickory House v. Brown, Fla.1955, 77 So. 2d 249, 252. . Goldin v. Lipkind, Fla.1950, 49 So. 2d 539, 27 A.L.R.2d 816; Ross v. Heitner, Fla.App.1963, 156 So. 2d 869; Easton v. Weir, Fla.App.1960, 125 So. 2d 115; Sec. 426, Rest. Torts.…
-
Modlin v. Wash. Ave. Food Ctr., Inc., 208 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…ecurs for consideration upon the mandate of the Supreme Court of the State of Florida pursuant to the decision and judgment of that court reversing a prior decision and judgment of this court. Washington Avenue Food Center, Inc. v. Modlin, Fla.1967, 205 So. 2d 295. By our prior decision, Modlin v. Washington Avenue Food Center, Inc., 178 So. 2d 596, we reversed the summary judgment for Washington Avenue Food Center, Inc., entered by the Circuit Court of Dade County. In accord with the directive of the judgmen…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Slavin v. Sanford KAY, 108 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1958)
- Hall v. Holland, 47 So.2d 889 (Fla. 1950)
- MAI KAI, Inc. v. Mary Colucci and her husband, 205 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1967)
- Modlin v. Wash. Ave. Food Ctr., Inc., 178 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)