Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2001

Lynch v. Target Stores

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided August 1, 2001 · Dell, Owen, Taylor, William

790 So. 2d 1193; 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 10839; 2001 WL 864292 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

Evelyn Palavicini v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP (11th Cir. 2019)
Evelyn Palavicini v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP. (11th Cir. 2019)
Linda McCarthy v. Broward College and Sunshine Cleaning Systems, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)
Mashni v. LaSalle Partners Management Ltd. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)
James Deakins v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP (11th Cir. 2024)
SANDRA LEFTWICH v. WAL-MART STORES EAST, LP AND THOMAS SCHOENDORF (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2024)
Vanessa Sutton v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP (11th Cir. 2023)
Vazquez v. Target Corporation (United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida 2022)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

In this slip and fall case the court entered summary judgment for the store owner.1 We reverse.

Appellant Freeda Lynch slipped and fell on a creamy substance on the floor of appellee’s store. She alleged that such substance constituted a dangerous condition of which the defendant had constructive knowledge. Plaintiffs affidavit stated that for a period of fifteen minutes she and her daughter had been shopping in the cosmetics area, within view of the nearby area where she subsequently fell. During that fifteen minutes no other customers, and no Target employees, entered or exited the area where the fall occurred. The facts, viewed most favorably to the plaintiff, support a reasonable inference that the foreign substance had been on the floor for a minimum of fifteen minutes. Whether that is sufficient time in which appellee should have become aware of this condition is for the trier of fact. See Montgomery v. Fla. Jitney Jungle Stores, Inc., 281 So.2d 302 (Fla. 1973); Little v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc., 234 So.2d 132 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DELL and TAYLOR, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.

. The summary judgment does not state the basis upon which it was entered but the motion and the briefs on this appeal focus upon evidence as to the length of time the substance had been on the floor prior to plaintiff’s slip and fall.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.