Roman Spa, Inc. v. Lubell

364 So. 2d 115, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16694
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedNovember 21, 1978
DocketNo. X-179
StatusPublished

This text of 364 So. 2d 115 (Roman Spa, Inc. v. Lubell) 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
Roman Spa, Inc. v. Lubell, 364 So. 2d 115, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16694 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

MILLS, Judge.

In Roman Spa, Inc. v. Lubell, 334 So.2d 298 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), we reversed the final judgment entered by the trial court in favor of Lubell. By its decision in Lubell v. Roman Spa, Inc., 362 So.2d 922 (1978), the Supreme Court reversed our decision, reinstated the judgment and remanded the case to us with directions that we consider the points on appeal originally raised by Spa against the indemnity verdict in favor of Connors. It was unnecessary that we initially consider this issue.

Lubell sued Spa for damages alleging that Spa negligently maintained the ceiling, and that the negligent condition of the ceiling was known by it or had existed for a sufficient length of time that Spa should have known of it. Spa filed a third party complaint against Connors seeking indemnification in the event it was found liable to Lubell. The jury found for Lubell and for Connors. A detailed statement of the case and of the facts can be found in Roman Spa, Inc., supra.

Spa, in its reply brief, states:

“If Roman Spa knew of the defective and dangerous ceiling . . . or if Roman Spa should have known of it because it would have been discovered upon inspection, then responsibility for the condition is Roman Spa’s, not Connors. . . .”
“Connors should have been dismissed from the case at the beginning, or at the close of the case upon the ground that plaintiff had not elected to sue it and it was not, under the facts and theory of the case, liable to Roman Spa.”

We affirm the judgment in favor of Connors.

McCORD, C. J., and SMITH, J., concur.

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

Related

Roman Spa, Inc. v. Lubell
334 So. 2d 298 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
Lubell v. Roman Spa, Inc.
362 So. 2d 922 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
364 So. 2d 115, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16694, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roman-spa-inc-v-lubell-fladistctapp-1978.