Legal Opinion

Dearing v. Reese

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 10, 1988No. 87-18PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ZEHMER, Judge.

Daniel Sears Dearing, Jr., the plaintiff below, appeals a directed verdict for the defendant Stuart Reese in this negligence action for breach of duty to provide Dear-ing a safe place to work. We reverse.

Viewing the evidence and reasonable inferences from the evidence in a light most favorable to Dearing, the record reflects the following facts. Reese, who has renovated and sold houses on several prior occasions, purchased a house in Tallahassee to renovate and resell. Subsequently, Dearing was hired to do general labor on the house. Dearing’s job was described as “basic labor”…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. City of Pompano BeachSupreme Court of Florida · 1950
  2. Yearty, Et Vir. v. SmithSupreme Court of Florida · 1935
  3. McGee v. C. Ed. DeBrauwere & Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1935
  4. Hicks v. KempSupreme Court of Florida · 1955
  5. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. Of America v. McConnellCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hancock v. Department of CorrectionsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
  2. Benitez v. JOSEPH TRUCKING, INC.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011
  3. Gonzalez v. Seabest, Inc.District Court, S.D. Florida · 2024
  4. Iviricu v. VelascoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API