MIRIAM ROSEN, ET VIR,
v.
CITY OF MIAMI
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 affirmed a judgment for the City of Miami, holding that a city's removal of a stop sign did not absolve motorists of their duty to drive with due care, especially when both parties entered the intersection simultaneously and could have avoided the collision by slowing down.
No, the city cannot be held liable. Motorists have a continuing duty to drive with due care, and the removal of a stop sign does not relieve them of this responsibility, especially when the accident could have been avoided by slowing down.
“The mere fact that stop signs are placed at street intersections does not remove the responsibility of motorists to drive with due care for their safety.”
Establishes that the presence or absence of stop signs does not negate a driver's duty of care.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMiriam Rosen sued the City of Miami for personal injuries sustained in an automobile collision. She alleged the city was negligent for removing a stop…
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 Personal Injury cases and more on FLexlaw
This writ of error is to a final judgment on demurrer to a declaration seeking to recover damages for personal injuries to the plaintiff in error, received in an automobile collision at the intersection of Southwest 16th Avenue with Southwest Eleventh Street in the City of Miami. It is contended that the negligence of the City consisted in removing a stop sign from Southwest Eleventh Street which had been there for some time and was required by the ordinances of the city as a safety device.
The mere fact that stop signs are placed at street intersections does not remove the responsibility of motorists to drive with due care for their safety. It is shown that both cars entered the intersection at the same time in full view of the occupants in each and that the collision could have *665been avoided if either had slowed up and given the other the right of way. Motorists driving headlong into each other in this manner are guilty of negligence and cannot hold the City liable for damages incurred. Stop signs are nothing more than cautionary devices they do not relieve the responsibility to drive with care.
Finding no reason to reverse the judgment below it is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Buford and Thomas, J. J., concur.
Chapman, J., concurs in opinion and judgment.
Justices Whitfield and Brown not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Foley v. Hialeah Race Course, 53 So.2d 771 (Fla. 1951)…to indicate a breach of duty which proximately contributed to plaintiff's injury. The allegations are too vague and general to state a cause of action. The proximate cause of plaintiff's injury was by no act of defendant. See Rosen v. City of Miami, 141 Fla. 664, 193 So. 749; Williams v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 56 Fla. 735, 48 So. 209, 24 L.R.A.,N.S., 134. The judgment is affirmed. SEBRING, C.J., and CHAPMAN and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.…
-
Food Fair, Inc. v. Augusta Gold, 464 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…breach of duty which proximately contributed to plaintiffs injury. The allegations are too vague and general to state a cause of action. The proximate cause of plaintiffs injury was by no act of defendant. See, Rosen v. City of Miami, 141 Fla. 664, 193 So. 749; Williams v. Atlantic Coastline R. Co., 56 Fla. 735, 48 So. 209, 24 L.R.A., N.S. 134.” 53 So. 2d at 771. Schatz v. 7-Eleven, Inc., 128 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961) was an appeal from a summary final judgment in favor of a defendant which owned a…
-
City OF Tampa v. Finley, 152 Fla. 335 (Fla. 1943)…t the end of Twigg Street. Prior to the accident warning signs were maintained [*338] by the City at this point, but were not there when plaintiff approached the dead end street. The appellant cites the case of Rosen v. City of Miami, 141 Fla. 664, 193 So. 749, involving an automobile collision at the intersection of Southwest 16th Avenue with Southwest Eleventh Street in the City of Miami, in which this Court considered stop signs placed at street intersections to be observed by motorists for their safet…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence