South Florida Personal Injury Lawyers Blog

Florida Premises Liability and Wet Floor Accidents

Published on: December 14, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

A recent decision from Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal addresses an essential issue in premises liability cases: whether a business can be held responsible for a customer’s injuries caused by a slippery floor. The case involved a customer who slipped and fell in a restaurant restroom, allegedly due to a freshly mopped floor. The customer argued that the restaurant failed to adequately warn patrons about the dangerous condition and failed to maintain the floor in a safe condition.

The appellate court ultimately reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for the restaurant, finding sufficient evidence for a jury to determine whether the restaurant had actual or constructive knowledge of the wet floor. This ruling highlights key considerations for slip-and-fall claims in Florida, particularly the burden of proof required to establish negligence and the significance of evidence like witness testimony and maintenance procedures.

Establishing Negligence in Florida Premises Liability Cases

In Florida, property owners must maintain their premises reasonably safe and warn visitors of known hazards. For a successful premises liability claim, you must demonstrate:

The property owner had actual or constructive knowledge of the hazard;
The hazard caused your injury; and
The property owner failed to take reasonable steps to address or warn about the danger.

In this case, the victim presented evidence that the restroom floor was wet due to an employee’s recent mopping. The restaurant argued that there was no proof the floor was wet at the time of the fall. Still, the victim’s testimony, combined with evidence of the employee’s mopping practices, created a genuine issue of material fact for the jury.

The Role of Causation in Florida Car Accident Cases

Published on: December 5, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

A recent ruling by Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal emphasizes the critical role causation plays in personal injury claims following car accidents. In this case, a victim sought damages for injuries allegedly sustained in a 2019 rear-end collision. While the jury ultimately awarded over $1.6 million, the defense argued on appeal that causation remained a contested issue, and the trial court erred by removing it from jury consideration.

The appellate court’s decision to reverse the directed verdict on causation underscores the importance of proving the direct connection between the at-fault party’s negligence and the injuries claimed. In Florida car accident cases, demonstrating causation is often among the most challenging and hotly debated aspects.

What is Causation in Florida Personal Injury Cases?

Causation refers to the legal requirement that a victim must prove their injuries directly resulted from the at-fault party’s negligence. In car accident cases, this means showing that the at-fault party’s actions, such as failing to stop in time, caused the injuries for which the victim seeks compensation.

Understanding Your Rights After a Multi-Vehicle Crash in Miami

Published on: November 30, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

A recent multi-vehicle crash in Miami left five people hospitalized, highlighting the serious risks of accidents involving multiple cars. According to reports, the collision occurred near Northwest 103rd Street and Northwest 17th Avenue, resulting in a chaotic scene of damaged vehicles, blocked traffic, and emergency responders working to assist the injured. While authorities are still investigating the cause of the crash, incidents like these raise important questions about liability, safety, and the legal options available to accident victims.

At Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, we understand how overwhelming the aftermath of a car accident can be. From navigating medical treatments to dealing with insurance claims, the road to recovery is often complicated. If you or a loved one has been injured in a similar accident, knowing your rights and legal remedies is crucial to securing the compensation you need.

Common Causes of Multi-Vehicle Crashes

Multi-vehicle crashes often result from a chain reaction of events. Speeding, distracted driving, poor weather conditions, or driver inexperience can all contribute to collisions that involve multiple cars. In some cases, a single negligent driver may set off a series of events that lead to widespread damage and injury. In Miami, where high traffic density and aggressive driving habits are common, these risks are amplified.

Determining fault in multi-vehicle accidents can be challenging, as multiple parties may share responsibility. For example, one driver may be at fault for following too closely, while another could be speeding or failing to maintain proper lane discipline. These complex scenarios make it essential to have an experienced attorney evaluate your case and gather evidence to establish liability.

Who Can Be Held Responsible in Florida Truck Accidents Involving Commercial Vehicles?

Published on: November 25, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

A tragic crash in Miami Gardens earlier this week involving a Publix tractor-trailer and a pickup truck has raised questions about liability in accidents with commercial vehicles. The collision occurred near a Publix distribution center when the tractor-trailer was making a left turn, and a speeding pickup truck slammed into its trailer. Sadly, the pickup truck driver did not survive, and the incident highlights the complexities of determining responsibility in such cases under Florida law.

Can Employers Be Held Accountable for Their Drivers’ Actions?

In Florida, trucking companies like Publix may be held accountable for accidents involving their drivers through vicarious liability under the legal doctrine of respondeat superior. This principle means an employer can be held responsible for the negligent actions of its employees if those actions occur within the scope of employment.

Can Texting While Driving Lead to Punitive Damages in Florida Auto Accident Cases?

Published on: November 10, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

Florida law allows injured individuals to seek punitive damages in certain auto accident cases where a driver’s behavior is deemed reckless or grossly negligent. A recent case involving an alleged texting-and-driving collision sheds light on what qualifies for punitive damages and the challenges plaintiffs face in proving such claims.

Texting While Driving and Gross Negligence

The case arose from a crash between a truck and a golf cart at a busy intersection. The victims alleged that the truck driver was texting while driving, which caused the accident. During his deposition, the truck driver admitted to briefly looking at his phone to check a text from his wife. He acknowledged that texting while driving is reckless and unreasonable.

Understanding Your Rights After a Workers’ Compensation Denial in Florida

Published on: November 3, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

A recent Florida workers’ compensation case sheds light on the challenges injured workers face when seeking benefits for ongoing care. The case involved a cashier who suffered an electrical shock while plugging in a cash register at work. Although her initial injury was accepted as compensable, her employer and insurer later denied her claims for additional treatment, arguing that a preexisting genetic condition was the major contributing cause (MCC) of her medical needs. This case highlights the importance of understanding your rights and options when facing a denial in Florida’s workers’ compensation system.

Injured Worker’s Fight for Ongoing Care

The worker initially reached maximum medical improvement in 2020 after treatment for her workplace injury. However, in 2022, her symptoms worsened significantly, leading to issues such as balance problems, hand weakness, and bladder dysfunction. Further evaluation revealed a genetic condition, neurofibromatosis type I, which had caused tumors compressing her spinal cord. She underwent surgery to remove the most problematic tumor, but her doctor noted that additional tumors would require ongoing care.

Despite the severity of her symptoms and the connection to the initial work injury, her employer and insurer denied her claims for continued treatment. They argued that the genetic condition, not the work injury, was the MCC of her medical needs. The worker filed a petition for benefits to secure the necessary care, but the employer disputed her claim, relying on earlier medical opinions.

Florida’s Major Contributing Cause Standard

Under Florida Statutes § 440.09(1)(b), workers’ compensation benefits are only awarded if the workplace accident is the major contributing cause of the injury or need for treatment. This standard requires showing that the work injury is more than 50% responsible for the condition compared to any preexisting conditions.

Families Seeking Compensation After Fatal Construction Accidents in Florida

Published on: October 31, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

A tragic construction accident recently claimed the life of a worker in Miami Beach, underscoring the dangers faced by those in the construction industry. The incident, which occurred on a job site near Ocean Terrace, is being investigated as a potential traffic homicide, which may involve heavy machinery or road-related hazards. While the exact details of this accident remain under investigation, it raises important questions about the legal protections available to construction workers and their families when a fatal accident occurs on the job.

In Florida, construction workers are exposed to numerous daily risks, from falls and equipment malfunctions to vehicle collisions on or near construction sites. When these risks lead to injury or death, legal options are available to the worker or their surviving family members, including workers’ compensation benefits and, in some cases, wrongful death lawsuits. Understanding the distinctions between these legal options is essential for ensuring the family receives the full compensation they deserve.

The Role of Workers’ Compensation in Construction Accidents

Workers’ compensation is a no-fault system designed to provide financial assistance to employees who are injured or killed while on the job. In the event of a construction worker’s death, the worker’s surviving family members may be entitled to death benefits under Florida’s workers’ compensation laws. These benefits generally include coverage for funeral expenses and a percentage of the worker’s lost wages up to a certain limit. However, workers’ compensation is limited in scope—it does not provide compensation for non-economic damages such as pain and suffering or loss of companionship.

Understanding Uninsured Motorist Coverage and Insurance Obligations in Florida

Published on: October 27, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

A recent decision by Florida’s appellate court sheds light on important issues surrounding uninsured motorist (UM) coverage and the responsibilities of insurance companies when policies are updated or expanded. The case involved whether a newly insured party added to an existing policy was entitled to UM coverage despite the original policyholder’s prior rejection. While the trial court initially ruled in favor of the new insured, the appellate court reversed this decision, clarifying how UM coverage is handled under Florida law.

In Florida, auto insurance policies must include UM coverage unless the named insured explicitly rejects it in writing. This coverage protects individuals involved in accidents with uninsured or underinsured drivers. Understanding when and how UM coverage applies, particularly when new individuals are added to a policy, is critical for drivers seeking compensation after a collision.

Uninsured Motorist Coverage and Policy Changes in Florida

In this Florida case, the dispute arose after a new spouse was added as a named insured to an existing auto insurance policy. The insurance company had not provided the newly added insured a new UM Selection/Rejection Form, leading to a lawsuit. The trial court ruled that the new insured should have been offered the opportunity to accept or reject UM coverage. However, the appellate court disagreed, stating that the original named insured’s rejection of UM coverage applied to all subsequent policy changes, including adding a new insured.

Court Reverses Florida Premises Liability Verdict in Case Involving Hazardous Ramp

Published on: October 14, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

A recent decision by the District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida’s Fourth District has brought attention to critical aspects of premises liability law. The case involved a victim who suffered a fall on a ramp at an office complex, claiming the ramp’s uneven slope caused her injuries. The victim sued the property owner for premises liability, arguing that the ramp was unsafe and did not meet Florida’s building standards. However, the court ultimately reversed the initial verdict, highlighting the importance of proving the property owner’s knowledge of the dangerous condition under Florida law.

This case emphasizes the legal requirements for establishing fault in premises liability claims and reminds injured parties that they must provide compelling evidence that the property owner was aware or should have been aware of the hazard.

Premises Liability and the Duty of Property Owners

Premises liability law in Florida requires property owners to maintain reasonably safe conditions for those who lawfully enter their property. If a dangerous condition exists, the owner has a duty to either correct it or provide adequate warning. However, to succeed in a premises liability lawsuit, a victim must prove that the property owner had actual or constructive knowledge of the hazardous condition and failed to take appropriate action.

In this case, the victim fell on a ramp that, according to her expert witness, did not meet the slope standards required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Florida Building Code. The architect testified that the ramp’s uneven and steep slope exceeded acceptable limits, which could pose a danger to anyone using it. The victim who had walked on the ramp numerous times before the fall, testified that she injured her leg due to the slope.

Despite these claims, the property owner argued that the ramp had been installed over two decades earlier and had passed multiple inspections without issue. No one had previously reported any problems with the ramp, and the owner had no knowledge of its potential danger. The court found that the victim failed to provide evidence that the owner had actual or constructive knowledge of the ramp’s hazardous condition, ultimately reversing the trial court’s decision in favor of the property owner.

Florida Court Reverses Personal Injury Verdict After Tenant’s Fall on Unsafe Flooring

Published on: October 7, 2024 | by Friedman Rodman Frank & Estrada, P.A.

A recent decision by the District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida has underscored the legal responsibilities landlords and property management companies have when it comes to maintaining rental units. The case involved a tenant who sustained injuries after falling on loose floor tiles in his apartment, leading to a lawsuit against both the condominium association and the property management company. The court’s reversal of the initial summary judgment highlights the importance of understanding Florida’s negligence laws and the ongoing duty property owners have to ensure their premises remain safe for tenants.

Negligence and Landlord’s Continuing Duty to Repair Dangerous Conditions

In Florida, landlords have a dual responsibility: a pre-possession duty to inspect and repair the property before a tenant moves in and a post-possession duty to address dangerous conditions reported by the tenant. Florida Statutes and case law clearly outline these responsibilities, especially when tenants report potentially hazardous conditions that could lead to injury.

In this case, the tenant had been residing in his apartment for over a year when he experienced a fall due to loose floor tiles near the entrance of his unit. The tenant’s wife had previously reported the loose tiles to both the property management company and the condominium association, giving them ample notice of the problem. The tenant, however, was forced to continue walking through the hazardous area because it was the only entrance to the unit.

The property owner and management company argued they were not liable because the tenant knew about the loose tiles, and the hazard was “open and obvious.” The trial court initially agreed, granting summary judgment in favor of the property owner and management company. However, on appeal, the court reversed this decision, explaining that the landlord’s duty to repair hazardous conditions does not disappear simply because the tenant is aware of the problem.