MANUEL VARGAS v. DOLPHIN MALL ASSOCIATES, LLC ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •        Third District Court of Appeal
    State of Florida
    Opinion filed December 22, 2021.
    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
    ________________
    No. 3D20-1027
    Lower Tribunal No. 18-17039
    ________________
    Manuel Vargas,
    Appellant,
    vs.
    Dolphin Mall Associates, LLC, et al.,
    Appellees.
    An appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Martin Zilber,
    Judge.
    Steinger, Greene & Feiner P.A., and Ron Vinograd (Fort Lauderdale),
    for appellant.
    Marcos Rothman Scharf Valdes Nguyen & Goldstein, P.L., and David
    M. Goldstein, and Katharine T. Healey (South Hollywood); Cooney Trybus
    Kwavnick Peets, and Warren B. Kwavnick (Fort Lauderdale), for appellees.
    Before SCALES, MILLER, and LOBREE, JJ.
    MILLER, J.
    Appellant, Manuel Vargas, challenges a final order granting summary
    judgment in favor of appellees, Dolphin Mall Associates, LLC, and Federal
    Cleaning Contractors, Inc., in his negligence lawsuit arising out of a slip and
    fall. Considering the length of time the purportedly dangerous condition
    existed before the accident occurred, in conjunction with “the size, nature,
    and inherent risks of the area in question,” McCarthy v. Broward Coll., 
    164 So. 3d 78
    , 81 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015), we discern no error in the conclusion by
    the lower tribunal that the evidence of record was insufficient to establish
    appellees had sufficient “actual or constructive knowledge of [a] dangerous
    condition” to take remedial action. § 768.0755(1), Fla. Stat. (2021); see
    Dominguez v. Publix Super Mkts., Inc., 
    187 So. 3d 892
    , 894 (Fla. 3d DCA
    2016) (“In transitory foreign substance cases, courts look to the length of
    time the condition existed before the accident occurred.”); Gaidymowicz v.
    Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 
    371 So. 2d 212
    , 214 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (concluding
    that, with only one minute of actual notice and insufficient evidence of
    constructive notice regarding the spill, the store did not have sufficient time
    to correct the dangerous condition and therefore could not be liable); De Los
    Angeles v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 
    326 So. 3d 811
    , 812 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)
    (affirming summary judgment finding the store did not have actual or
    2
    constructive notice of the dangerous condition where the customer had been
    in an aisle alone for three to five minutes before slipping and an employee
    had checked the aisle five minutes before the incident occurred); Walker v.
    Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 
    160 So. 3d 909
    , 912 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (affirming
    summary judgment in favor of the grocery store and noting that, at most, the
    substance was on the floor no more than four minutes before the fall, which
    was insufficient to satisfy the statute’s actual or constructive notice
    requirement). Accordingly, we affirm the order under review.
    Affirmed.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-1027

Filed Date: 12/22/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/22/2021