Legal Opinion · Dissent

Starling v. Saha

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 24, 1986No. 85-633Published

1DissentSharp, Judge

I believe the summary judgment granted to defendants on the attractive nuisance count in this case was improper.

The lower court granted summary judgment based upon its findings that the pond was in the control of the independent contractor, that Dr. Saha did not know the pump was a dangerous risk to the neighborhood children who trespassed to swim in the pond, and that Saha did not know Davis, one of the independent contractors, was running the pump at the time that Chad Starling drowned. I do not believe Saha had to have actual knowledge. The depositions and affidavit in the record disclose…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Florida Power and Light Co. v. PriceSupreme Court of Florida · 1964
  2. Maldonado v. Jack M. Berry Grove Corp.Supreme Court of Florida · 1977
  3. Carter v. Livesay Window Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1954
  4. In Re Estate of StarlingDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API