Banks v. City of Tampa

112 So. 2d 888, 1959 Fla. App. LEXIS 2969
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 20, 1959·No. No. 241·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The record reveals the existence of a genuine issue as to a material fact, namely, [889]*889whether or not appellant wife saw or should have seen the alleged defect in the sidewalk of the City of Tampa. Accordingly, the summary judgment entered below against the plaintiffs-appellants should be reversed. Rule 1.36(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 30 F.S.A.; Mullis v. City of Miami, Fla.1952, 60 So.2d 174; Smith v. Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., Fla.1956, 87 So.2d 581; Delany v. Breeding’s Homestead Drug Co., Fla.1957, 93 So.2d 116; Farrey v. Bettendorf, Fla.1957, 96 So.2d 889; Bess v. 17545 Collins Avenue, Inc., Fla.1957, 98 So.2d 490; Buck v. Hardy, Fla.App. 1958, 106 So.2d 428; Mason v. Renick, Fla.App.1958, 107 So.2d 38.

Reversed.

KANNER, C. J., ALLEN, J., and WALDEN, JAMES H., Associate Judge, concur.

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

Banks v. City of Tampa, 112 So. 2d 888, 1959 Fla. App. LEXIS 2969 (Fla. Ct. App. 1959).

112 So. 2d 888 (Banks v. City of Tampa) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of Tampa v. Banks
120 So. 2d 788 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1960)