Bigger v. Monroe County

731 So. 2d 862, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 6428, 1999 WL 312262
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 19, 1999·No. No. 98-1411·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Even if, as the appellant contends, the supplemental jury instruction on attractive nuisance was error, there was no theory upon which the appellant could prevail given the facts and circumstances of this case. See Gibson v. Avis Rentr-A-Car Sys., Inc., 386 So.2d 520 (Fla.1980); Tampa Elec. Co. v. Jones, 138 Fla. 746, 190 So. 26 (1939).

Affirmed.

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

Bigger v. Monroe County, 731 So. 2d 862, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 6428, 1999 WL 312262 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

731 So. 2d 862 (Bigger v. Monroe County) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gibson v. Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc.
386 So. 2d 520 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1980)
Tampa Electric Co. v. Jones
190 So. 26 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1939)