Dramstadt v. City of West Palm Beach
Decision Date | 17 June 1955 |
Citation | 81 So.2d 484 |
Parties | Margaret DRAMSTADT, Appellant, v. CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH, a municipal corporation, and West Palm Beach WaterCompany, a corporation, Appellees. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Harry Goodmark, West Palm Beach, and J. Ben Watkins of Truett & Watkins, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Robert H. Anderson, Don G. Nicholson, Wilson Smith, Miami, and Russell L. Frink, Jacksonville, for appellees.
Appellant instituted this action against appellees to recover damages for personal injuries. The complaint charges inter alia that about 11:00 P.M., January 5, 1953, she alighted from an automobile parked in front of 334 Murray Road, West Palm Beach, stepped on a grass strip of parkway inside the curb that was lawfully used by pedestrians; that West Palm Beach Water Company had installed a water meter box in said parkway which protruded above the ground about two inches so as to constitute an impediment on the path of those using the parkway; that there were no signs or lights to warn of the presence of said meter box, account of which plaintiff tripped and fell, injuring herself seriously.
Appellees as defendants interposed answers to the complaint and moved for summary judgment, to which motion they attached photographs of the locus. Affidavits and counter affidavits were also filed and the motion for summary judgment was granted on the theory that the area where the water meter box was placed was not intended to be used by pedestrians and being so, the plaintiff could not recover damages against defendants for any injury she received when walking on the parkway. The complaint was accordingly dismissed and the plaintiff has appealed from that order.
Two questions are raised but the real point in issue is whether or not the pleadings presented a question of negligence or contributory negligence that should have been submitted to a jury.
It is a matter of common knowledge that water meter boxes are frequently placed in parkways and much case law has been promulgated from controversies arising out of them. To discuss them would require a long opinion that would amount to nothing more than a venture in logomachy which I am not inclined to take because it would add nothing to the law. This is true because each case arises from the peculiar facts, is not a precedent for future adjudications so a lengthy recital of them would serve no useful purpose. It is further true because strong cases can usually be stated concisely while a weak one requires 'words, words, words,'...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Marshall By Marshall v. City of Centralia
...travel on them at their own risk. City & County of Denver v. Farmer (1952), 125 Colo. 462, 244 P.2d 1086; Dramstadt v. City of West Palm Beach (Fla.1955), 81 So.2d 484. Whether the defendant owed the plaintiff a duty requires this court to refer to the language of section 3-102(a) (Ill.Rev.......
-
City of Pensacola v. Stamm, AR-307
...149 Fla. 326, 5 So.2d 593 (1942); Kitchen, et al. v. City of Jacksonville, 158 Fla. 621, 29 So.2d 441 (1947); Dramstadt v. City of West Palm Beach, 81 So.2d 484 (Fla.1955); Musetto v. City of Miami Beach, 82 So.2d 595 (Fla.1955); Lisk v. City of West Palm Beach, 160 Fla. 632, 36 So.2d 197 (......
-
Savignac v. Dept. of Transp., 80-1561.
...has no duty to warn of dangers on the property, and those who so use the property do so at their own risk. Dranstadt v. City of West Palm Beach, 81 So.2d 484 (Fla. 1955); Biltmore Terrace Associates v. Kegan, 130 So.2d 631 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961), cert. discharged, 154 So.2d 825 (Fla. 1963). The......
-
6345 Collins Ave., Inc. v. Fein
...v. Tip Top Grocery Co., 1942, 151 Fla. 247, 9 So.2d 366; Frederichs Market v. Knox, Fla.1953, 66 So.2d 251 and Dramstadt v. City of West Palm Beach, Fla.1955, 81 So.2d 484. Where the evidence on the question is in conflict, the absence or presence of contributory negligence is a question to......