Mary Abarca v. Bass Pro Outdoor World, LLC

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: March 26, 2025
• Docket: 3D2024-1001
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed March 26, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D24-1001 Lower Tribunal No. 21-27477-CA-01 ________________

Mary Abarca, Appellant,

vs.

Bass Pro Outdoor World, LLC, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ariana Fajardo Orshan, Judge.

The Law Firm of Arianna M. Mendez, PLLC, and Arianna M. Mendez, for appellant.

Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, and Russell M. Pfeifer and Monika Ledlova, for appellee.

Before EMAS, LINDSEY and LOBREE, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Earley v. Morrison Cafeteria Co. of Orlando, 61 So. 2d

477, 478 (Fla. 1952) (stating that it is “well settled that the proprietor has a

right to assume that the invitee will perceive that which would be obvious to

him upon the ordinary use of his own senses”); Brookie v. Winn-Dixie Stores,

Inc., 213 So. 3d 1129, 1133 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (holding that trial court

properly entered summary judgment in favor of premises owner where empty

pallet located by store’s exit on which plaintiff tripped and fell “was open and

obvious and not inherently dangerous” and previously observed by plaintiff);

Smith v. Westdale Asset Mgmt., Ltd., 353 So. 3d 108, 111 (Fla. 1st DCA

2022) (“Generally, a business owes no duty to warn an invitee of an open

and obvious condition when the business’s ‘knowledge’ of the condition is

not superior to that of the invitee.”); TruGreen Landcare, LLC v. LaCapra,

254 So. 3d 628, 631 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018) (“[S]ome conditions are considered

so obvious and not inherently dangerous that they do not, as a matter of law,

support liability for the breach of the duty to maintain the premises in a

reasonably safe condition.”).