Moore v. O'Connor

106 So. 2d 606
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 18, 1958·No. No. 58-46·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The tenant sued the landlord for an injury occasioned by a rotted bannister. Final summary judgment was entered for defendant. Although the landlord had made a covenant for general repairs, it conclusively appeared from the pleadings and depositions on file together with the affidavits that neither the landlord nor the tenant had knowledge of the latent defect. The judgment is affirmed upon authority of the rule set forth in Butler v. Maney, 146 Fla. 33, 200 So. 226; Sampson v. Stanley Corp., Fla.1954, 75 So.2d 186; cf. Propper v. Kesner, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 1.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.

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

Moore v. O'Connor, 106 So. 2d 606 (Fla. Ct. App. 1958).

106 So. 2d 606 (Moore v. O'Connor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Richards v. Dodge
150 So. 2d 477 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1963)
Goldstein v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company
142 So. 2d 115 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1962)