Gomez v. Holtz

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gomez v. Holtz

810 So. 2d 1014, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 2382, 2002 WL 341989

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 6, 2002

DocketNo. 4D01-1801

StatusPublished

This text of 810 So. 2d 1014 (Gomez v. Holtz) 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

Gomez v. Holtz, 810 So. 2d 1014, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 2382, 2002 WL 341989 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final summary judgment entered in favor of appellee, Richard Holtz, the defendant in the circuit court. A person hitting a golf ball has a duty to exercise ordinary care, under the circumstances then surrounding him, for the safety of persons reasonably within the range of danger. See Miller v. Rollings, 56 So.2d 137, 138 (Fla.1952). An issue of fact remains concerning whether the noise from the riding lawn mower was sufficient to place Holtz on notice that the mower driver was in the line of fire of the golf shot. See Jesters v. Taylor, 105 So.2d 569, 571 (Fla.1958) (Roberts, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

STEVENSON, GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final summary judgment entered in favor of appellee, Richard Holtz, the defendant in the circuit court. A person hitting a golf ball has a duty to exercise ordinary care, under the circumstances then surrounding him, for the safety of persons reasonably within the range of danger. See Miller v. Rollings, 56 So.2d 137, 138 (Fla.1952). An issue of fact remains concerning whether the noise from the riding lawn mower was sufficient to place Holtz on notice that the mower driver was in the line of fire of the golf shot. See Jesters v. Taylor, 105 So.2d 569, 571 (Fla.1958) (Roberts, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).

STEVENSON, GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

810 So. 2d 1014, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 2382, 2002 WL 341989, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gomez-v-holtz-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack