Medina v. 187th Street Apartments, Ltd.
| Decision Date | 03 November 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. 80-1450,80-1450 |
| Citation | 405 So.2d 485 |
| Parties | Virgilio MEDINA and Digna Medina, his wife, Appellants, v. 187TH STREET APARTMENTS, LTD., Max Cogen and Carib Management, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
DeMeo & Sherman and Thomas G. Sherman, Miami, for appellants.
Marlow, Shofi, Ortmayer, Smith, Connell & Valerius and Joseph H. Lowe, Miami, for appellees.
Before BARKDULL, NESBITT and BASKIN, JJ.
This is an appeal from the entry of a directed verdict in favor of the defendants who owned and operated an apartment complex wherein the plaintiff was criminally assaulted in the parking lot. We find that there was a triable issue of fact as to the defendants' duty to protect the plaintiff from criminal acts. Accordingly, we reverse.
Plaintiff, Virgilio Medina, was mugged in the defendants' parking lot. When the assault occurred, he was returning to his car after escorting two young ladies who lived in the apartment complex home from church services. Plaintiff commenced the action against the defendants alleging that they were negligent by their failure to: (1) warn persons lawfully on the premises of the danger of criminal assaults; (2) take reasonable measures to provide safe ingress and egress; (3) limit access to the parking lot; and (4) provide security protection to invitees within the complex. At trial, the apartment complex manager indicated that he had actual knowledge that persons had been mugged in the complex. A police officer testified that due to domestic disputes, juvenile disturbances, and breaking and entering of apartments, he would classify the apartment as a high crime area. At the close of the plaintiff's case, a motion for directed verdict was granted.
In reviewing the propriety of a directed verdict, all conflicts are to be resolved in the plaintiff's favor and all reasonable inferences from the evidence are to be taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Balart v. Michel's Kartway, Inc., 364 So.2d 90 (Fla.3d D.C.A. 1978); Homan v. County of Dade, 248 So.2d 235 (Fla.3d DCA 1971). Where there is any evidence to justify a possible verdict for the non-moving party, even if a preponderance of the evidence favors the movant, a directed verdict is an encroachment on the province of the jury. Hernandez v. Motrico, Inc., 370 So.2d 836 (Fla.3d DCA 1979). Our review of the record in light of these standards reveals that a directed verdict was improper.
In an extensive analysis of the duty of a landowner to one on his property, the court, in Wood v. Camp, 284 So.2d 691 (Fla.1973) stated:
It may be that on the facts in a particular case the determination of the category of the plaintiff must be determined as a matter of law by the trial judge, as in other cases in this respect; other causes will present a factual issue for the jury as to whether plaintiff is invitee, licensee or trespasser under appropriate instructions.
When it is a question for the judge or the jury depends on whether the facts of the particular issue are in dispute. Where, as here, the facts relevant to the plaintiff's status are undisputed (he entered the premises to escort two tenants back to their apartment), it was within the judge's province to make such a determination.
In that regard, we find that the trial judge's conclusion that the plaintiff was an invitee was correct in light of the guidelines set out in Woods, supra. See also, Manassa v. New Hampshire Insurance Company, 332 So.2d 34 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976), cert....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Vittengl v. Fox
...would remand for and allow a new trial since the plaintiff made a submissible case against the defendant. Medina v. 187th Street Apartments, Ltd., 405 So.2d 485, 487 (Fla.App.1981). 1 Because of the disposition of this case on other grounds, we need not address herein issues raised by appel......
-
Vazquez v. Lago Grande Homeowners Ass'n
...Condo. Ass'n v. Feldman, 426 So.2d 1054 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), pet. for review denied, 434 So.2d 887 (Fla.1983); Medina v. 187th Street Aparts. Ltd., 405 So.2d 485 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Ten Associates v. McCutchen, 398 So.2d 860 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), review denied, 411 So.2d 384 (Fla.1981); Winn-D......
-
Fernandez v. Miami Jai-Alai, Inc.
...did not lie in this case. See, e.g., Orlando Executive Park, Inc. v. Robbins, 433 So.2d 491 (Fla.1983); Medina v. 187th Street Apartments, Ltd., 405 So.2d 485 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Fincher Investigative Agency, Inc. v. Scott, 394 So.2d 559 (Fla. 3d DCA), pet. for review denied, 402 So.2d 609 ......
-
Latham v. Aronov Realty Co.
...be followed in his case. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Johnstoneaux, 395 So.2d 599 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1981); Medina v. 187th St. Apartments Ltd., 405 So.2d 485 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1981); Taylor v. Centennial Bowl, Inc., 65 Cal.2d 114, 52 Cal.Rptr. 561, 416 P.2d 793 (1966); Morgan v. Bucks Associate......
-
Premises liability: a notable rift in the law of foreseeable crimes.
...defendant because of disputed facts, but requiring a showing of prior similar crimes (assault)); Medina v. 187th St. Apartments, Ltd., 405 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 3d D.C.A. 1981) (reversing directed verdict for defendant because of disputed facts, but requiring a showing of prior similar crimes (a......