Henley v. Eastern Airlines

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Henley v. Eastern Airlines

559 So. 2d 96, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1415, 1990 WL 20393

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 8, 1990

DocketNo. 89-574

StatusPublished

This text of 559 So. 2d 96 (Henley v. Eastern Airlines) 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

Henley v. Eastern Airlines, 559 So. 2d 96, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1415, 1990 WL 20393 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from entry of a final summary judgment in favor of appellees, Orlando Regional Aviation Authority and Eastern Airlines.

A party moving for summary judgment must “show conclusively the absence of any genuine issue of material fact” and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Wills v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 351 So.2d 29, 30 (Fla.1977) [emphasis in original]. The movant’s burden is even more onerous in negligence actions where summary judgment procedures historically have been employed with special care. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966). “Unless a movant can show unequivocally that there was no negligence, or that plaintiff’s negligence was the sole proximate cause of the injury, courts will not be disposed to granting a summary judgment.” Wills, 351 So.2d at 31.

Appellant Henley was standing in a curbside baggage check-in line outside the terminal at Orlando Regional Aviation Authority on October 1, 1986. She apparently stepped backwards when the baggage handler came to pick up her bags and fell over another passenger’s box. Because we think the record presents material issues as to who employed the baggage handler and whether he was negligent, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. See Bravo v. Chapkis, 549 So.2d 798 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Farrar v. Arthur, 544 So.2d 1170 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

GOSHORN and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

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

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from entry of a final summary judgment in favor of appellees, Orlando Regional Aviation Authority and Eastern Airlines.

A party moving for summary judgment must “show conclusively the absence of any genuine issue of material fact” and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Wills v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 351 So.2d 29, 30 (Fla.1977) [emphasis in original]. The movant’s burden is even more onerous in negligence actions where summary judgment procedures historically have been employed with special care. Holl v. Talcott, 191 So.2d 40 (Fla.1966). “Unless a movant can show unequivocally that there was no negligence, or that plaintiff’s negligence was the sole proximate cause of the injury, courts will not be disposed to granting a summary judgment.” Wills, 351 So.2d at 31.

Appellant Henley was standing in a curbside baggage check-in line outside the terminal at Orlando Regional Aviation Authority on October 1, 1986. She apparently stepped backwards when the baggage handler came to pick up her bags and fell over another passenger’s box. Because we think the record presents material issues as to who employed the baggage handler and whether he was negligent, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. See Bravo v. Chapkis, 549 So.2d 798 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Farrar v. Arthur, 544 So.2d 1170 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

GOSHORN and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

559 So. 2d 96, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1415, 1990 WL 20393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/henley-v-eastern-airlines-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack