Loewenstein v. Safety Harbor Spa, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Loewenstein v. Safety Harbor Spa, Inc.

260 So. 2d 893, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 7041

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 21, 1972

DocketNo. 71-643

StatusPublished

This text of 260 So. 2d 893 (Loewenstein v. Safety Harbor Spa, 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

Loewenstein v. Safety Harbor Spa, Inc., 260 So. 2d 893, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 7041 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, plaintiff below, appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of appellee, defendant in the negligence action below.

We are of the view that the deposition of appellant, the sole evidence upon which the summary judgment was bottomed, does not conclusively establish her contributory negligence as a matter of law. It is well settled “that summary judgments should be entered with caution, and that even if the evidence is uncontradicted, the trial court lacks the authority to enter a summary judgment if the evidence is susceptible to conflicting inferences.”¹ In addition, other potential witnesses, not yet deposed, may cast further light on the question of the alleged negligence of appellee as well as contributory negligence of appellant.

Reversed and remanded.

LILES, A. C. J., and MANN and Mc-NULTY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, plaintiff below, appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of appellee, defendant in the negligence action below.

We are of the view that the deposition of appellant, the sole evidence upon which the summary judgment was bottomed, does not conclusively establish her contributory negligence as a matter of law. It is well settled “that summary judgments should be entered with caution, and that even if the evidence is uncontradicted, the trial court lacks the authority to enter a summary judgment if the evidence is susceptible to conflicting inferences.”¹ In addition, other potential witnesses, not yet deposed, may cast further light on the question of the alleged negligence of appellee as well as contributory negligence of appellant.

Reversed and remanded.

LILES, A. C. J., and MANN and Mc-NULTY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 So. 2d 893, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 7041, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loewenstein-v-safety-harbor-spa-inc-fladistctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack