Sari v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.
Opinion
Zoltan SARI and Pauline Sari, His Wife, Appellants,
v.
AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY Company and Rebecca C. Gerson, Appellees.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Abrams, Anton, Robbins, Resnick, Schneider & Mager, Hollywood, and Robert Pasin, West Palm Beach, for appellants.
Ress, Gomez, Rosenberg & Howland, North Miami, and Steven Edelstein, Miami, for appellees.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and BASKIN, JJ.
*65 PER CURIAM.
We conclude that the step-down between the tile floor of an apartment hallway and the carpeted, necessarily flexible, pile surface of the adjacent bedroom which came to the same level, and upon which the plaintiff fell, was so obvious that, as a matter of law, neither warning nor correction of the condition was required. Schoen v. Gilbert, 436 So.2d 75 (Fla. 1983). Accordingly, the summary judgment entered below for the defendant owner is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
452 So. 2d 64 (Sari v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.