Peters v. City of Tampa
| Decision Date | 03 July 1934 |
| Citation | 155 So. 854,115 Fla. 666 |
| Parties | PETERS v. CITY OF TAMPA. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Hillsborough County; F. M. Robles, Judge.
Action by Helen Evans Peters, as administratrix of the estate of Robert Lansing Peters, deceased, against the City of Tampa. To review an adverse decision, plaintiff brings error.
Reversed.
COUNSEL E. T. Shurley and E. B. Drunwright, both of Tampa, for plaintiff in error.
Alonzo B. McMullen and Ralph A. Marsicano, both of Tampa, for defendant in error.
An amended declaration alleged that the defendant city of Tampa by an artificial construction of its own, confined a natural stream of water in a concrete sewer and thereby so augmented the natural force and violence of the water flowing therein against the sandy banks of the stream on the portions thereof which were not so confined as to undermine said banks of said stream; that adjacent to the banks of the stream was a large open space of ground used as a playground for children; that to such natural playground children had for a long time been accustomed to resort to play; that, by reason of the augmented force of the water occasioned by the city's act in placing in part of the stream its own artificial construction, the natural banks of the stream had become undermined and precipitous and subject to the always imminent danger of caving in; that such dangerous condition the city of Tampa, through its agents, servants, and employees knew, or by exercise of reasonable care and caution should have known, created a condition of extreme peril to children attracted to the vacant premises whereon they were habitually accustomed to play, allured thereto by the attractive nature of the sandy banks of the stream in that vicinity; that, notwithstanding the attractive nuisance so created and maintained by the city, the city negligently and carelessly permitted and allowed the point of danger to remain without erection of barriers or fencings, and posted no signs or warnings thereon, nor shored up the dangerous banks of said stream, nor otherwise protected same, but permitted same to remain as a menace to children who were, by the nature of the banks and running water, enticed to the premises, as a result of which Robert Lansing Peters, a 10 year old child, was negligently and carelessly killed by a 'cave-in' of the banks of the stream while he was playing on the premises...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bicandi v. Boise Payette Lumber Co.
... ... R. A. 1916D, 443; ... Smith v. McGoldrick Lbr. Co., 124 Wash. 363, 214 P ... 819; Peters v. Bowman, 115 Cal. 345, 47 P. 113, 598, ... 56 Am. St. 106.) ... In the ... Barnhart ... 411, 420, 54 S.Ct. 487, 78 L.Ed. 882; Sioux City & P. R ... Co. v. Stout, 84 U.S. 657, 17 Wall. 657, 21 L.Ed. 745; ... Union P. Ry. Co. v ... Linnberg v. City of Rock Island, 136 Ill.App. 495; ... 45 C. J. 758; Peters v. City of Tampa, 115 Fla. 666, ... 155 So. 854; Ramsay v. Tuthill Building Material ... Co., 295 Ill. 395, 129 ... ...
-
Parish v. Pitts
...176 S.W.2d 344 (Tex.Civ.App.1943). (7) Child killed by injury on city property under attractive nuisance doctrine. Peters v. City of Tampa, 115 Fla. 666, 155 So. 854 (1934). (8) Failure to adequately maintain drains or sewers to prevent clogging. City of Tucson v. O'Reilly Motor Co., 64 Ari......
-
Hudson v. Weiland
... ... 10; Christopher Co. v. Russell, 63 Fla ... 191, 58 So. 45, Ann.Cas.1913C, 564; Peters v. City of ... Tampa, 115 Fla. 666, 155 So. 854; Williams v. City ... of Jacksonville, 118 ... ...
-
Atlantic Peninsular Holding Co. v. Oenbrink
...Florida. See Stark v. Holtzclaw, 90 Fla. 207, 105 So. 330, 41 A.L.R. 1323; May v. Simmons, 104 Fla. 707, 140 So. 780; Peters v. City of Tampa, 115 Fla. 666, 155 So. 854. See, also, Osborn v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. 86 Kan. 440, 121 P. 364; Oglesby v. Metropolitan & West Side Elec. Ry. Co.,......