Kraver v. Edelson
| Decision Date | 27 November 1951 |
| Citation | 55 So.2d 179 |
| Parties | KRAVER et al. v. EDELSON et al. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Mark Silverstein, Miami Beach, for appellants.
Dixon, DeJarnette & Bradford, Miami, for appellees.
The appellants, who are husband and wife, went to the Triton Hotel in Miami Beach to have dinner. They were accompanied by their child and the mother of the appellant, Doris Kraver. After dinner the appellant, Samuel Kraver, and the child went out of the hotel ahead of Doris Kraver and her mother. They waited on a sidewalk which was on the hotel property about eight to twelve feet from the front entrance to the hotel. Not more than ten minutes later the appellant, Doris Kraver came from the hotel accompanied by her mother.
As Doris Draver stepped from the hotel lobby through the front door entrance of the hotel onto the front terrace, she stepped on a cigar butt, her heel went over and she fell, fracturing a bone in her ankle.
The declaration alleged that the defendants were negligent in permitting the cigar butt to remain on the terrace because the defendants knew of its presence, or by the exercise of reasonable and ordinary care, should have known of its presence.
The appellees filed pleas to the declaration alleging they were not guilty and charging the appellants with contributory negligence.
While Samuel Kraver was waiting on the sidewalk he testified that he saw the doorman of the hotel several times 'run' in and out of the hotel and pass over the spot where the cigar butt lay. According to his testimony there was plenty of light at that spot, the cigar butt looked as though it had been tramped upon, it was messed up, the leaves hung, and it looked as though it had been unraveled. He could see the cigar butt from where he was standing on the sidewalk. Mr. Kraver was asked by the Court whether he thought the cigar butt appeared to be danagerous and he said,
This was the only testimony as to any dangerous condition or that the hotel manager or operator or the employees knew, or should have know, that the cigar butt was there. This testimony is uncontradicted and it falls far short of showing any dangerous condition which the hotel manager or owners or their employees knew, or by the exercise of reasonable diligence, could have known.
Doris Kraver testified that when she was leaving the hotel there were people in front of her and they blocked the view ahead of her so that she was unable to see the cigar butt.
Only the two witnesses testified for the plaintiffs...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McAllister v. Tucker
...are not to overlook the presumption that the trial court's ruling was correct. Roberts v. Powell, 137 Fla. 159, 187 So. 766; Kraver v. Edelson, Fla., 55 So.2d 179; Dodson v. Solomon, 134 Fla. 284, 183 So. The primary reliance of appellant for reversal is, that this is a comparative negligen......
-
City of Jacksonville v. Stokes
...118, 10 So.2d 916; Tutwiler v. I. Beverally Nalle, Inc., 152 Fla. 479, 12 So.2d 163; Miller v. Shull, Fla., 48 So.2d 521; Kraver v. Edelson, Fla., 55 So.2d 179; Breau v. Whitmore, Fla., 59 So.2d 748; Earley v. Morrison Cafeteria Co. of Orlando, Fla., 61 So.2d 477; Bowles v. Elkes Pontiac Co......
-
Florida Power & Light Co. v. Bell
...90 So.2d 908; Tatom v. Seaboard Air Line R. Co., 93 Fla. 1046, 113 So. 671; Swilley v. Economy Cab Co., Fla., 56 So.2d 914; Kraver v. Edelson, Fla., 55 So.2d 179; Reardon v. Florida West Coast Power Corp., 97 Fla. 314, 120 So. 842; Richmond v. Florida Power & Light Co., Fla., 58 So.2d 687; ......
-
Castillo v. Baker's Shoe Stores, Inc., 1218
...789 (Fla.1953); Connolly v. Sebeco, Inc., 89 So.2d 482 (Fla.1956); Carls Markets, Inc. v. Leonard, 73 So.2d 826 (Fla.1954); Kraver v. Edelson, 55 So.2d 179 (Fla.1951). There being no genuine issue as to the defendant's knowledge of the presence of the cigar butt on the lobby floor prior to ......