Chisolm v. R & R Auto Parts, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Chisolm v. R & R Auto Parts, Inc.

422 So. 2d 1010, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21686

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 24, 1982

DocketNo. AJ-173

StatusPublished

This text of 422 So. 2d 1010 (Chisolm v. R & R Auto Parts, Inc.) 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

Chisolm v. R & R Auto Parts, Inc., 422 So. 2d 1010, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21686 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Chief Judge.

This summary judgment for defendant is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff’s step or misstep, upon exiting defendant’s store through the door she previously entered, is not shown by any evidence or inference to have been caused by some structural defect or irregularity of which defendant was reasonably required to give some special notice. Plaintiff conceivably was slightly and momentarily distracted as she left the store, but defendant had no duty, under the circumstances shown here, to anticipate and prevent that. Contrast Spence v. Pen Air Federal Credit Union, 421 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

AFFIRMED.

McCORD and MILLS, JJ., concur.

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

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Chief Judge.

This summary judgment for defendant is AFFIRMED. Plaintiff’s step or misstep, upon exiting defendant’s store through the door she previously entered, is not shown by any evidence or inference to have been caused by some structural defect or irregularity of which defendant was reasonably required to give some special notice. Plaintiff conceivably was slightly and momentarily distracted as she left the store, but defendant had no duty, under the circumstances shown here, to anticipate and prevent that. Contrast Spence v. Pen Air Federal Credit Union, 421 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).

AFFIRMED.

McCORD and MILLS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

422 So. 2d 1010, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 21686, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chisolm-v-r-r-auto-parts-inc-fladistctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack