Hodges v. Walsh

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hodges v. Walsh

553 So. 2d 221, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2617, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6285, 1989 WL 135396

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 8, 1989

DocketNo. 89-00381

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 553 So. 2d 221 (Hodges v. Walsh) 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

Hodges v. Walsh, 553 So. 2d 221, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2617, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6285, 1989 WL 135396 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

LEHAN, Judge.

In this personal injury suit for damages allegedly suffered by plaintiff upon falling after slipping on a “sticky spot” on the approach to a lane at defendant’s bowling establishment, we reverse the directed verdict entered in favor of defendant.

We cannot conclude that there was no evidence on the basis of which the jury could have found in favor of plaintiff. See Smith v. Brantley, 455 So.2d 1063 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), rev. denied, 462 So.2d 1107 (1985). More specifically, we cannot conclude that there was no evidence on the basis of which the jury could have found, from the apparently dried condition of the sticky substance, that defendant had had sufficient constructive notice that a dangerous condition of the kind which allegedly caused the fall had existed. See Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Williams, 264 So.2d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972).

Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.

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

LEHAN, Judge.

In this personal injury suit for damages allegedly suffered by plaintiff upon falling after slipping on a “sticky spot” on the approach to a lane at defendant’s bowling establishment, we reverse the directed verdict entered in favor of defendant.

We cannot conclude that there was no evidence on the basis of which the jury could have found in favor of plaintiff. See Smith v. Brantley, 455 So.2d 1063 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), rev. denied, 462 So.2d 1107 (1985). More specifically, we cannot conclude that there was no evidence on the basis of which the jury could have found, from the apparently dried condition of the sticky substance, that defendant had had sufficient constructive notice that a dangerous condition of the kind which allegedly caused the fall had existed. See Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Williams, 264 So.2d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972).

Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and FRANK, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

553 So. 2d 221, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2617, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6285, 1989 WL 135396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hodges-v-walsh-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack