Moulden v. Jefferson Standard Life Inc. Co.

• Decision Date: 07 June 1940
• Citation: 196 So. 688,143 Fla. 344
• Parties: MOULDEN v. JEFFERSON STANDARD LIFE INC. CO.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

196 So. 688

143 Fla. 344

MOULDEN v. JEFFERSON STANDARD LIFE INC. CO.

Florida Supreme Court, Division A.

June 7, 1940

Error to Circuit Court, Orange County; Frank A. Smith, Judge.

Action by Nettie Moulden, a widow, against the Jefferson Standard Life Insurance Company to recover for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff when she slipped and fell on the lobby floor of a public office building owned by the defendant.Te review an adverse judgment, the plaintiff brings error.

Judgment affirmed.

COUNSELW. K. Whitfield, Jr., and George P. Garrett both of Orlando, for plaintiff in error.

Giles &amp Gurney, of Orlando, for defendant in error.

OPINION

TERRELL Chief Justice.

Plaintiff in error brought this action to recover for personal injuries incurred from slipping and falling on the lobby floor of a public office building, the property of defendant in error.Plaintiff was an elderly lady and the slippery condition of the floor was due to moisture incident to weather conditions.The original and two amended declarations went down under demurrer, final judgment was entered for the defendant, and writ of error was prosecuted.

The sole question is whether or not the declaration as amended was sufficient to withstand demurrer.

There is no dispute about the facts.Plaintiff in error relies on Section 4, Declaration of Rights, Constitution of Florida, as basis for recovery.If the owner of the building had been the insurer of the safety of the plaintiff as an invitee on its premises, there might be substance to this contention, but since there are degrees in care as well as in negligence, the question presented turns on the degree of care the declaration alleges that the owner took to safeguard those entering its premises.

The mere fact of receiving bodily injuries does not entitle the victim to recover damages.Section 4, Declaration of Rights does not change the general law on the subject.It must be shown that some one was negligently responsible for or contributed to the injury.The floor on which the accident in question took place was one where the public was invited to go.It was the type of floor in general use, was in good condition at the time, and had at all times been kept in workmanlike order.

The owner was on notice that it was required to exercise ordinary and reasonable care for the safety of the plaintiff.The declaration does not allege that it failed in this.One going on the street or in other public places is required to exercise due care to protect his own safety.Corporate and other...