Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Claire's Boutiques, Inc. v. Locastro

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided April 25, 2012No. 4D09-968Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLevine, J.

I agree with the majority’s finding that the trial court correctly denied a directed verdict for Claire’s on the Locastros’ negligence claim, as the Locastros presented sufficient evidence of causation to establish a prima facie claim of negligence. However, I respectfully disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment for Claire’s on its claim of contractual indemnity. I agree with the majority’s certification to the supreme court.

The majority relies on a line of cases which states that parents are generally immune from tort claims brought by…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Sosa v. Alvarez-MachainSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. State v. EganSupreme Court of Florida · 1973
  3. Mazzoni Farms, Inc. v. EI DuPont De Nemours and Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 2000
  4. McMahan v. TotoCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
  5. Ard v. ArdSupreme Court of Florida · 1982

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API