Foley v. Hialeah Race Course

53 So. 2d 771, 1951 Fla. LEXIS 1602
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedAugust 3, 1951
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 53 So. 2d 771 (Foley v. Hialeah Race Course) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Foley v. Hialeah Race Course, 53 So. 2d 771, 1951 Fla. LEXIS 1602 (Fla. 1951).

Opinion

53 So.2d 771 (1951)

FOLEY et ux.
v.
HIALEAH RACE COURSE, Inc.

Supreme Court of Florida, Division B.

August 3, 1951.

Brown & Dean, Miami, for appellants.

George J. Baya, Miami, for appellee.

ADAMS, Justice.

We review a judgment holding plaintiff's complaint was insufficient to state a cause of action.

The complaint alleged that defendant maintained a park where horse racing was conducted; that auxiliary thereto defendant maintained a parking lot as a convenience to its patrons; that defendant "carelessly and negligently supervised, maintained and controlled the said race park and parking area, in that there were an insufficient number of traffic attendants; that the said attendants were improperly stationed; that the said attendants were not performing their duties; and that there were insufficient traffic warning devices and controls."

Plaintiff asserts that by reason of defendant's neglect, while driving his own automobile, he collided with an automobile being driven by a third party, who was departing from the parking lot, and was damaged.

The judgment is correct. There is nothing inherently dangerous about a parking lot. No factual allegation is made to indicate a breach of duty which proximately contributed to plaintiff's injury. The allegations are too vague and general to state a cause of action. The proximate cause of plaintiff's injury was by no act of defendant. See Rosen v. City of Miami, 141 Fla. 664, 193 So. 749; Williams v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 56 Fla. 735, 48 So. 209, 24 L.R.A.,N.S., 134.

The judgment is affirmed.

SEBRING, C.J., and CHAPMAN and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Liebherr-America, Inc. v. McCollum
43 So. 3d 65 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Steigman v. Danese
502 So. 2d 463 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Food Fair v. Gold
464 So. 2d 1228 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Finley v. Fountainebleau Hotel Corp.
398 So. 2d 490 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Harrell v. Martin
345 So. 2d 868 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1977)
Pierson v. Sewell
539 P.2d 590 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1975)
Grignolo v. Carroll
246 So. 2d 153 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1971)
Hopkins v. Panama Plaza Construction Corp.
237 So. 2d 8 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)
Hoewt ex rel. Hoewt v. Early
182 So. 2d 53 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)
Walker v. Feltman
111 So. 2d 76 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1959)
Charles H. Goldman v. Hollywood Beach Hotel Company
244 F.2d 413 (Fifth Circuit, 1957)
Jackson v. Pike
87 So. 2d 410 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1956)
Heps v. Burdine's, Inc.
69 So. 2d 340 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1954)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 So. 2d 771, 1951 Fla. LEXIS 1602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foley-v-hialeah-race-course-fla-1951.