Holmes v. Don Mealey Chevrolet, Inc.
| Decision Date | 16 May 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-1456,84-1456 |
| Parties | 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1229 Raymond L. HOLMES, Appellant, v. DON MEALEY CHEVROLET, INC., et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Margaret E. Sojourner, of Daze & Sojourner, P.A., Orlando, for appellant.
James M. Talley, of Fisher, Rushmer, Werrenrath, Keiner, Wack & Dickson, P.A., Orlando, for appellees.
The final judgment for defendant in this personal injury action is reversed because we conclude that the trial court erred in granting defendant's motion for directed verdict at the close of the plaintiff's case.
A directed verdict is proper only when the record conclusively shows an absence of facts or inferences from facts to support a jury verdict. Ferber v. Orange Blossom Center, Inc., 388 So.2d 1074 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). The evidence must be viewed in a light most favorable to the non-moving party to the motion for directed verdict; the plaintiff/appellant here. Otey v. Florida Power and Light Company, 400 So.2d 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), rev. denied, 412 So.2d 465 (Fla.1982).
Plaintiff tripped and fell as he entered from defendant's parking lot into defendant's parts department. There was evidence presented that he caught his toe on the unfinished edge of carpet that wrapped over the edge of a step leading into this entrance, but which carpet did not go down the full height of the step riser. There was also testimony that the carpet had been installed by one of defendant's employees, who had been told by his superior to wrap the carpet over the edge of the step but not to bring it all the way down. There was expert testimony presented that installing carpet in this manner was dangerous because it created a potential "trip area."
There was thus sufficient evidence upon which a jury could conclude that the defendant created and maintained a dangerous condition on its business premises thus breaching its duty to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition for its invitees, Pittman v. Volusia County, 380 So.2d 1192 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), and that the maintenance of that condition proximately caused or contributed to plaintiff's injury. The case should not have been taken from the jury.
REVERSED and REMANDED for a new trial.
The edge of the carpet in question had been safely glued to the vertical rise of the step for a long period of time before the accident...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schreidell v. Shoter
...from facts to support a jury verdict, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Holmes v. Don Mealey Chevrolet, Inc., 468 So.2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Ferber v. Orange Blossom Center, Inc., 388 So.2d 1074 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Otey v. Florida Power & Light Co.,......
-
Tinwood N.V. v. Sun Banks, Inc., 89-2281
...Hartnett VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 517 (Securities Violation) v. Fowler, 94 So.2d 724 (Fla.1957). See generally, Holmes v. Don Mealey Chevrolet, Inc., 468 So.2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Williams v. Meyer, 474 So.2d 1214 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Jennings v. Ray, 484 So.2d 1267 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Th......
-
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. McKenzie, 85-2740
...from facts to support a jury verdict, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Holmes v. Don Mealey Chevrolet, Inc., 468 So.2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Guy v. Kight, 431 So.2d 653 (Fla. 5th DCA In the instant case, there was some evidence presented by the plain......
-
Ginsberg v. Chastain
...in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Schreidell v. Shoter, 500 So.2d 228 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Holmes v. Don Mealey Chevrolet, Inc., 468 So.2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Rivera v. Randle Eastern Ambulance Service, 446 So.2d 200 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). No factual determination is theref......