You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Ropella v. Santa Fe Steakhouse of Fruitville, Inc.

Citations: 696 So. 2d 850; 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3740Docket: Nos. 95-05234, 96-01657

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; April 11, 1997; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Appellants, a husband and wife, appealed a final judgment against them in a slip and fall negligence case against Santa Fe Steakhouse. The court found no error in the final judgment; however, both parties agreed that the award of attorney fees should be reversed based on the precedent set in Knealing v. Puleo, 675 So.2d 593 (Fla. 1996). Consequently, the court affirmed the final judgment in favor of Santa Fe Steakhouse but reversed the attorney fee award. Judges Danahy and Schoonover concurred with this decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Judicial Concurrence

Application: Judges Danahy and Schoonover concurred with the decision to affirm the final judgment and reverse the attorney fee award.

Reasoning: Judges Danahy and Schoonover concurred with this decision.

Reversal of Attorney Fees Based on Precedent

Application: The award of attorney fees was reversed in accordance with the precedent established in Knealing v. Puleo.

Reasoning: Both parties agreed that the award of attorney fees should be reversed based on the precedent set in Knealing v. Puleo, 675 So.2d 593 (Fla. 1996).

Slip and Fall Negligence

Application: The court affirmed the final judgment in favor of Santa Fe Steakhouse, indicating no error in the handling of the negligence claim.

Reasoning: The court found no error in the final judgment; however, both parties agreed that the award of attorney fees should be reversed based on the precedent set in Knealing v. Puleo, 675 So.2d 593 (Fla. 1996).