Daytona Beach Personal Injury Lawyers
Free Consultations 386.258.1622

Florida Second DCA rules in premises liability case that “obvious danger” doctrine did not support summary judgment for defendants because questions of fact remained as to whether defendants should have anticipated that the dangerous condition would cause injury

On December 17, 2021, in Conrad v. The Boat House of Cape Coral, LLC, No. 2D20-227, the Florida Second DCA reversed a trial court’s summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a slip and fall premises liability case after concluding that genuine issues of material fact remained as to whether the defendants were negligent in not warning the plaintiff about cracks in a seawall which allegedly caused the plaintiff to fall and injure himself. Although the defendants argued that the condition of the seawall was or should have been obvious to the plaintiff, the Second DCA noted that the obvious danger doctrine is not dispositive if “the owner or possessor should anticipate the harm,” quoting from Pratus v. Marzucco's Constr. & Coatings, Inc., 310 So.3d 146, 149 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021), and that defendant could still be held liable for failing to exercise reasonable care to prevent foreseeable injury to the plaintiff even if the danger was obvious.