Amador ex rel. Amador v. Valdez

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Amador ex rel. Amador v. Valdez

561 So. 2d 423, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3334, 1990 WL 62865

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 15, 1990

DocketNo. 89-1269

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 561 So. 2d 423 (Amador ex rel. Amador v. Valdez) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Amador ex rel. Amador v. Valdez, 561 So. 2d 423, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 3334, 1990 WL 62865 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Eric Amador, a minor, appeals a final summary judgment in favor of ap-pellees, Mario Valdez and Reina Valdez, on appellant’s action for negligence. We affirm.

Appellant sought to recover damages for a personal injury allegedly sustained when he fell on his grandparent’s lawn. Most certainly the child fell and sustained an injury. However, the fact that he fell, without more, is insufficient to sustain an action for negligence. We find no material issues of fact, and therefore find that summary judgment was proper. See Moore v. Morris, 475 So.2d 666 (Fla.1985).

Appellant’s other issue concerning the trial court’s setting aside the default is without merit. Here, the trial court was well inside the parameters of judicial discretion. See Cabral v. Diversified Services, Inc., 560 So.2d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI