DELOIS JACKSON, APPELLANT,
v.
MARJORIE WILLIAMS AND COMMERCIAL UNION INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Delois Jackson was injured in an explosion in her sister's home and sued for negligence. The trial court granted summary judgment for the defendant, but the appellate court reversed, holding that material factual disputes existed regarding whether the property owner breached her duty to maintain safe premises and warn of dangers.
The trial court erred in granting summary judgment. The property owner owed a duty to keep the property reasonably safe and protect invitees from known or reasonably foreseeable dangers. Whether the owner breached this duty, whether the explosion resulted from the gasoline can's presence, and whether Jackson was aware of the danger are all issues for the jury to determine.
[1] A property owner owes a duty to keep the property reasonably safe and protect visitors from dangers of which the owner is, or should be, aware.
[2] The distinction between commercial visitors and social guests has been eliminated, and social guests are included within the category of invitees.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“He must keep his property reasonably safe and protect the visitor from dangers of which he is, or should be aware.”
Establishes the two-part duty owed by property owners to invitees under Florida law.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJackson resided in her sister Marjorie Williams' home approximately nine months per year for four years. She was injured in an explosion when she lift…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Invitee Status cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Judge.
Appellant, Delois Jackson, who was the plaintiff below, appeals from a final summary judgment entered in the Circuit Court for Orange County in favor of appellees, Marjorie Williams and Commercial Union Insurance Company.
Mrs. Jackson had resided in the home of her sister, Marjorie Williams, approximately nine months of each year for the past four years. She was injured in an explosion when she lifted the lid on the washing machine located in a small unventilated room in which Mrs. Williams stored a lawnmower and a can of gasoline. In her complaint for negligence, she alleged that Mrs. Williams had approximately caused her injuries by allowing gasoline vapors to accumulate, failing to warn of the danger and failing to repair a dangerous washing machine. Mrs. Jackson testified she was aware of the gasoline can, but she had detected no odor of gasoline. She admitted that the can had been in the same place for the past four years. Mrs. Williams, on the other hand, admitted that she was aware of the danger in storing gasoline in this manner. The question presented by this appeal is whether the court erred in granting summary judgment.
The Supreme Court in Wood v. Camp, 284 So. 2d 691 (Fla.1973), eliminated the distinction between commercial (business or public) visitors and social guests. Therefore, Mrs. Jackson, as a guest by invitation, is included within the category of “invitee.” As discussed by this court in Pittman v. Volusia County, 380 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), a property owner or occupier owes two duties to an invitee: “He must keep his property reasonably safe and protect the visitor from dangers of which he is, or should be aware.” Id. at 1193, citing Post v. Lunney, 261 So. 2d 146 (Fla.1972). The reasoning of Pittman is equally applicable here.
Mrs. Williams owed a duty to keep her property reasonably safe and to protect visitors from dangers of which she was or should have been aware. Whether she breached this duty is an issue for the jury to determine. Other issues to be submitted to the jury include whether the explosion was the result of the presence of the gasoline can in the laundry room and whether Mrs. Jackson was aware of the danger. Thus, the lower court erred in entering summary judgment.
Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and this cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
DAUKSCH, C. J., and ORFINGER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cassel v. Price, 396 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)…es, the appellate courts have had occasions to disapprove of court determinations on negligence issues, for example: Gibson v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 386 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 1980), (directed verdict for defendant reversed); Jackson v. Williams, 385 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), (summary judgment for defendant reversed); Zambito v. Southland Recreation Enterprises, 383 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1980), (dismissal of complaint reversed); Bennett v. Mattison, 382 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), (directed ve…
-
Wallach v. Rosenberg, 527 So. 2d 1386 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…jury to find for plaintiff whose sea wall collapsed because adjacent sea wall was removed in negligent manner). Ordinarily, it is the province of the jury to determine whether a defendant has breached a duty owed to a plaintiff. Jackson v. Wiliams, 385 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Cf. Banat v. Armando, 430 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) (whether a defendant breached a duty is a question of law where reasonable persons could not differ), rev. denied, 446 So. 2d 99 (Fla.1984). In this case reasonable persons…
-
Marriott Int'l, Inc. v. Zaira Perez-Melendez, 855 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…Department of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Yamuni, 529 So. 2d 258, 262 (Fla.1988)); Keene v. Chicago Bridge & Iron Co., 596 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Walt Disney World Co. v. Goode, 501 So. 2d 622 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Jackson v. Williams, 385 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Russell v. Jacksonville Gas Corp., 117 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960); see also Lubell v. Roman Spa, Inc., 362 So. 2d 922 (Fla.1978); Selvin v. DMC Regency Residence, Ltd., 807 So. 2d 676, 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Sanderson v. Ec…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wood v. Camp, 284 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1973)
- Post v. Lunney, 261 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 1972)
- Pittman v. Volusia Cnty., 380 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)