Warshaw v. Lavery Investment Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Warshaw v. Lavery Investment Co.

173 So. 2d 728, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4488

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 6, 1965

DocketNo. 64-712

StatusPublished

This text of 173 So. 2d 728 (Warshaw v. Lavery Investment Co.) 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

Warshaw v. Lavery Investment Co., 173 So. 2d 728, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4488 (Fla. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appeals a summary final judgment for the defendant in an action for personal injuries suffered by the plaintiff in a trip-and-fall case. It is establish[729]*729-ed without issue that the plaintiff appellant was the tenant of the defendant in a furnished apartment and that her action for damages was based upon an allegedly defective carpet in the apartment. It further appears without issue that she fully recognized and understood the nature of the defect and the danger involved. The trial judge correctly ruled that she was precluded from recovery by the rule applied in Perlman v. Kraemer, Fla.App.1958, 104 So.2d 609 and Joskowitz v. Holtman, Fla.App.1961, 134 So.2d 265.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appeals a summary final judgment for the defendant in an action for personal injuries suffered by the plaintiff in a trip-and-fall case. It is establish[729]*729-ed without issue that the plaintiff appellant was the tenant of the defendant in a furnished apartment and that her action for damages was based upon an allegedly defective carpet in the apartment. It further appears without issue that she fully recognized and understood the nature of the defect and the danger involved. The trial judge correctly ruled that she was precluded from recovery by the rule applied in Perlman v. Kraemer, Fla.App.1958, 104 So.2d 609 and Joskowitz v. Holtman, Fla.App.1961, 134 So.2d 265.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 So. 2d 728, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4488, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/warshaw-v-lavery-investment-co-fladistctapp-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack