LAFORREST A. SMITH, APPELLANT,
v.
POSTON BRIDGE & IRON, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION; AND PAUL H. SMITH CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., A CORPORATION, APPELLEES
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.
Electrician LaForrest Smith appealed a summary judgment dismissing his personal injury suit against two defendants after he fell through a hole in temporary decking at a construction site. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of one defendant but reversed as to the other, finding genuine issues of negligence and contributory negligence that required jury resolution.
Summary judgment was properly granted as to Paul H. Smith Construction Co., Inc., but was improper as to Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., where genuine issues of negligence and contributory negligence existed requiring resolution by a jury.
“With due regard, however, to the fact that it is a summary judgment which is appealed from, we think that the doubt which we have on this aspect of the case should be resolved in favor of a jury-trial of the issues of the negligence of Pos-ton and contributory negligence of the appellant.”
Establishes that doubts about negligence and contributory negligence issues in summary judgment appeals should favor jury trial resolution.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSmith, an experienced electrician, was working at the Miami Herald's printing press installation site. While walking down stairs around temporary wood…
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 Contributory Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
HOBSON, Justice.
This is an appeal by the plaintiff in a personal injury suit from a summary final judgment for defendants.
At the time of the alleged accident the Miami Herald Publishing Company was installing some new printing presses. Appellant’s employer was engaged by the Herald to perform electrical work. Appellee Paul H. Smith Construction Co., Inc., was employed to do some construction work, and appellee Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., was employed to do the iron and metal work in connection with the erection of the presses and the catwalks around them. Appellant, an experienced electrician, had been working daily on the job for about six months prior to the accident. On the day of the accident, he was walking down a flight of stair’s around the foot of which a temporary wooden decking had been constructed. Employees of Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., were removing wooden planks: from this decking and replacing them with steel plates. Appellant sustained his injuries when he fell through a hole in the decking caused by the removal of wooden planking by Poston employees. This hole had been covered when appellant had passed over the spot two hours before the accident, and he had not previously used the stairs when the hole was open.
We have reviewed the record and it is clear that there is no liability as to the Paul H. Smith Construction Có., Inc., and the summary judgment of dismissal as to this appellee must be affirmed.
As to the appellee, Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., the case-is extremely close on the issues of negligence and contributory negligence. See Breau v. Whitmore, Fla., 59 So. 2d 748, and Fields v. Quillian, Fla., 74 So. 2d 230. With due regard, however, to the fact that it is a summary judgment which is appealed from, we think that the doubt which we have on this aspect of the case should be resolved in favor of a jury-trial of the issues of the negligence of Pos-ton and contributory negligence of the appellant. See City of Jacksonville v. Stokes, Fla., 74 So. 2d 278, and Williams v. City of Lake City, Fla., 62 So. 2d 732.
Accordingly, the judgment appealed from must be, and it is hereby, reversed as to Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
DREW, C. J., and TERRELL and THORNAL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Isenberg v. Ortona Park Recreational Ctr., Inc., 160 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)…ive sidewalk case in which the Supreme Court added “whether her [plaintiff’s] conduct in failing to see and avoid the danger contributed to her injury under such circumstances was for the jury to decide.”); Smith v. Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., Fla., 87 So. 2d 581, (hazard in construction operations); Bess v. 17545 Collins Avenue, Inc., Fla., 98 So. 2d 490 (tripping over pipe crossing walkway in mid-afternoon — the Supreme Court said ‘‘Nor is the fact that in the photographs the condition appears to be an obv…
-
Beikirch v. City OF Jacksonville Beach, 159 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)…al demands that particular care be accorded in this field, to the end that controverted issues of fact be resolved not upon pleadings and depositions but by a jury functioning under proper instructions. See Smith v. Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., Fla., 87 So. 2d 581; National Airlines v. Florida Equipment Co., Fla., 71 So. 2d 741. * * *" After quoting the second sentence in the above quotation from the Drahota case, the District Court of Appeal, Third District of Florida, in Holmes v. Forty-Five Twenty-Five, I…
-
Drahota v. Taylor Constr. Co., 89 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 1956)…al demands that particular care be accorded in this field, to the end that controverted issues of fact be resolved not upon pleadings and depositions but by a jury functioning under proper instructions. See Smith v. Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., Fla., 87 So. 2d 581; National Airlines v. Florida Equipment Co., Fla., 71 So. 2d 741. Moreover, the basic circumstances of the case, considered with the plaintiff’s deposition, are at least sufficient to make out a prima facie case of negligence. See St. Germain v. Car…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williams v. City OF Lake City, 62 So. 2d 732 (Fla. 1953)
- City of Jacksonville v. Stokes, 74 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 1954)
- Fields v. Quillian, 74 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 1954)
- Breau v. Whitmore, 59 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 1952)