Sanchez v. Hialeah Chamber of Commerce

811 So. 2d 812, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 3553
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 20, 2002·No. Nos. 3D01-1399, 3D01-775·Published

Opinion

SHEVIN, Judge.

We affirm the final summary judgment in defendants’ favor. When viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, Sierra v. Shevin, 767 So.2d 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), the facts reveal that defendants had no duty to protect plaintiffs against criminal acts of third parties, see Hinckley v. Palm Beach County Bd. of County Comm’rs, 801 So.2d 193 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Gross v. Family Serv. Agency, Inc., 716 So.2d 337 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), approved sub nom. Nova Southeastern Univ., Inc. v. Gross, 758 So.2d 86 (Fla.2000); Boynton v. Burglass, 590 So.2d 446 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), and there is no showing that any "special relationship exception applies in this case that would alter this result. Hinckley; Gross; Boynton.

Affirmed.

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

Sanchez v. Hialeah Chamber of Commerce, 811 So. 2d 812, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 3553 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

811 So. 2d 812 (Sanchez v. Hialeah Chamber of Commerce) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Boynton v. Burglass
590 So. 2d 446 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Gross v. Family Services Agency, Inc.
716 So. 2d 337 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Sierra v. Shevin
767 So. 2d 524 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Hinckley v. Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners
801 So. 2d 193 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)