TAMEKA L. BUTLER, BY AND THROUGH HER PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, LEILA BUTLER, APPELLANTS,
v.
SMALL FRY, INC., D/B/A SMALL FRY EDUCATIONAL DAY CARE CENTERS, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1992-12-08
No. 92-211
Before BARKDULL, FERGUSON and GODERICH, JJ.
610 So. 2d 54 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1992) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

The trial court erred in granting summary judgment because the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence to establish a cause of action for negligent supervision, creating triable issues of fact.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff Tameka L. Butler sued defendant Small Fry, Inc. for negligent supervision. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendan…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, Tameka L. Butler, appeals from a final summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant, Small Fry, Inc., in this action for negligent supervision. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Summary judgments should be cautiously granted in negligence and malpractice suits. Giallanza v. Sands, 316 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 4th DCA1975). The law is well settled in Florida that a party moving for summary judgment must show conclusively the absence of any genuine issue of material fact and that the court must draw every possible inference in favor of the party against whom a summary judgment is sought. Wills v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 351 So. 2d 29 (Fla.1977); Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966), cert. denied, 232 So. 2d 181 (Fla.1969). A summary judgment should not be granted unless the facts are so crystallized that nothing remains but questions of law. Shaffran v. Holness, 93 So. 2d 94 (Fla.1957).

Moore v. Morris, 475 So. 2d 666, 668 (Fla. 1985).

We hold that the trial court erred in granting Small Fry’s motion for summary judgment where the evidence presented by Tameka was sufficient to establish a cause of action for negligent supervision and created triable issues. Accordingly, we reverse the final summary judgment under review and remand this cause for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Tornroos v. Denny's, Inc., 673 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
    …negligent supervision and thus the summary judgment was improvidently granted as to it. See Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966); Medina v. Metro Dade Police-Police Athletic League, 631 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Butler v. Small Fry, Inc., 610 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Smith v. Smith, 413 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Accordingly, we reverse the summary judgment as to the claim of negligent supervision and remand for further proceedings thereon. The final summary judgment is otherwise affirm…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw