McDaniel v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc., 75-419
| Decision Date | 17 February 1976 |
| Docket Number | No. 75-419,75-419 |
| Citation | 327 So.2d 893 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Lizann McDANIEL, Appellant, v. The GREAT ATLANTIC & PACIFIC TEA COMPANY, INC., Appellee. |
Wolfson, Diamond & Logan, and Elliott H. Lucas, Miami Beach, for appellant.
Adams, George, Wood, Lee & Schulte, Miami, for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.
Appellant, plaintiff below, appeals from a final judgment and order of the trial court granting appellee's, defendant below, motion for a directed verdict and denying appellant's motions to set aside the verdict, for a new trial, and objections to the proposed final judgment.
Appellant filed an amended complaint against appellee seeking damages for personal injuries caused by a fall on the premises of appellee's grocery store. The case was brought to trial on February 24, 1975, and at the close of appellee's case, the trial court granted its motion for a directed verdict. On February 28, 1975, the trial court entered its final judgment directing a verdict in favor of appellees. Thereafter, at a hearing held on March 13, 1975, the trial court denied appellant's motions to set aside the verdict, for a new trial, and objections to the proposed final judgment. On March 17, 1975, the trial court entered its order denying appellant's motions. From the final judgment and order, appellant brings this appeal.
Appellant contends that the trial court erred in entering the final judgment and order and raises the following points on appeal: (1) whether there was introduced at the trial sufficient evidence, or sufficient reasonable inferences which may be drawn from the evidence, which would support a jury verdict in favor of appellant, (2) whether a witness may specifically describe an area he has directly observed, and (3) whether the trial court erred in striking out that part of appellant's testimony which it appears to have stricken on page 446 of the transcript.
Appellee contends that the trial court did not err in directing a verdict in its favor because appellant failed to show how the liquid, in which appellant slipped and fell, came to be on the floor or how long it had been on the floor before her accident.
This court in Marlowe v. Food Fair Stores of Florida, Inc., Fla.App.1973, 284 So.2d 490, set forth at page 492 the basic rule concerning the duty of a food store to one of its patrons as follows:
'The established rule in this state is that if the dangerous condition of the premises is created by a servant or agent of the owner, or even if created by an outsider, and the condition is one which has existed for a sufficient length of time that the owner should have known of it, then under those circumstances the owner may be held liable for ensuing injuries.'
See also Montgomery v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wolmer v. Chrysler Corp.
...every reasonable intendment deducible from the evidence must be indulged in the plaintiff's favor." McDaniel v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 327 So.2d 893, 895 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); see also Hartnett v. Fowler, 94 So.2d 724 (Fla.1957); Toyota Motor Co. v. Moll, 438 So.2d 192 (Fla. 4th DC......
-
Church of Scientology of California v. Blackman
...the California Church. Viewing the testimony, as we must, in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, McDaniel v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 327 So.2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976), we find that Dr. Blackman established the following: (1) CPPR's incorporators are members of the Scientolog......
-
Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Schmidt
...1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Gaidymowicz v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 371 So.2d 212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); McDaniel v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, 327 So.2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Friedman v. Biscayne Restaurant, 254 So.2d 831 (Fla. 3d DCA The plaintiff acknowledges that there was no pr......
-
West v. South Florida Auto-Truck Dealers Ass'n, Inc.
...1111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Gaidymowicz v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., 371 So.2d 212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); McDaniel v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., Inc., 327 So.2d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Friedman v. Biscayne Restaurant, Inc., 254 So.2d 831 (Fla. 3d DCA ...