City of Miami Beach v. Quinn
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
Citation | 5 So.2d 593,149 Fla. 326 |
Parties | CITY OF MIAMI BEACH v. QUINN. |
Decision Date | 16 January 1942 |
J. Harvey Robillard, of Miami Beach, and L. A. Schroeder, Jr., of Miami, for plaintiff in error.
Carr & Carr and L. J. Cushman, all of Miami, for defendant in error.
This case is here on writ of error to review a judgment for plaintiff below entered by the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida. The plaintiff below sustained personal injuries on April 13 1940, by stepping into a depression, hole or excavation situated in a public parkway of the City of Miami Beach adjacent to 63rd Street, which is located between Indian Creek Drive and Collins Avenue. The plaintiff was injured while walking across a grass plot in which the city maintained and operated a pumping station. The negligence alleged was the failure of the city to keep the parkway in a safe condition for the use and benefit of pedestrians.
The testimony discloses that the plaintiff, while walking across the parkway at the point described in the declaration, stepped into the depression or excavation and was injured. The extent of the injuries sustained can or may be admitted for the purpose of a decision of this case. The pivotal point presented is whether or not the defendant, under the circumstances and conditions presented by this record, was guilty of negligence in permitting or allowing the depression to exist in a public parkway used by pedestrians.
It is settled law that a municipal corporation is liable for resulting injuries from a failure to repair streets or sidewalks. It is required to exercise reasonable diligence in repairing defects after the unsafe condition of the street or sidewalk is known or ought to have been known to the officers thereof having authority to act. See City of Orlando v. Heard, 29 Fla. 581, 11 So. 182. Likewise, the same rule was subsequently enunciated when it was held that municipal corporation have the power under the statutes of Florida to regulate and control the grading, constructing and repairing of streets and sidewalks, and in the exercise of this power it is charged with the duty of exercising reasonable diligence in the repair of defects in streets and sidewalks after the unsafe condition thereof is known to the officers having authority to act. See City of Daytona v Edson, 46 Fla. 463, 34 So. 954, 4 Ann.Cas. 1000; City of Pensacola v. Jones, 58 Fla. 208, 50 So. 874. The same rule...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cauley v. City of Jacksonville
...maintenance of city streets and sidewalks. Woods v. City of Palatka, 63 So.2d 636 (Fla.1953) (pothole in road); City of Miami Beach v. Quinn, 149 Fla. 326, 5 So.2d 593 (1942) (depression in road surface); City of Tallahassee v. Fortune. But a municipality was held immune from damages caused......
-
Grier v. Metropolitan Dade County
...Mullis v. City of Miami, 60 So.2d at 176; City of Jacksonville v. Foster, 41 So.2d 548, 549 (Fla.1949); City of Miami Beach v. Quinn, 149 Fla. 326, 327, 5 So.2d 593, 593 (Fla.1942) (A municipality "is required to exercise reasonable diligence in repairing defects after the unsafe condition ......
-
City of Tamarac v. Garchar
...78 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). Appellant relies upon City of Tallahassee v. Coles, 148 Fla. 606, 4 So.2d 874 (1941); City of Miami Beach v. Quinn, 149 Fla. 326, 5 So.2d 593 (1942); City of Fort Lauderdale v. Duchine, 70 So.2d 897 (Fla.1954), and other similar cases holding that a City owes no duty......
-
Bovio v. City of Miami Springs
...the city may only be liable if it is proven to have had actual or constructive knowledge of the condition. See City of Miami Beach v. Quinn, 149 Fla. 326, 5 So.2d 593 (1942); Kennedy, 429 So.2d at 1211-12; Leon v. City of Miami, 312 So.2d 518, 519 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); cf. Feldstein v. City o......