Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Grisales v. Eber, 17-2154 (2019)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 17-2154 Visitors: 2
Filed: Mar. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed March 6, 2019. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. _ No. 3D17-2154 Lower Tribunal No. 16-27307 _ Alirio Grisales, Appellant, vs. Beatriz Eber, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, John Schlesinger, Judge. Leto | Bassuk, and Brian L. Elstein, Larry Bassuk and Justin C. Leto, for appellant. GrayRobinson, P.A., and Jack R. Reiter and Robert C. Weill, for appellee. Before EMAS, C.
More
       Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                           Opinion filed March 6, 2019.
         Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                               ________________

                               No. 3D17-2154
                         Lower Tribunal No. 16-27307
                             ________________


                               Alirio Grisales,
                                    Appellant,

                                        vs.

                                 Beatriz Eber,
                                    Appellee.



      An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, John
Schlesinger, Judge.

      Leto | Bassuk, and Brian L. Elstein, Larry Bassuk and Justin C. Leto, for
appellant.

      GrayRobinson, P.A., and Jack R. Reiter and Robert C. Weill, for appellee.


Before EMAS, C.J., and SALTER and HENDON, JJ.

      PER CURIAM.
      Alirio Grisales appeals final summary judgment entered in favor of Beatriz

Eber on his claim for negligence. We affirm. See Fuentes v. Sandel, Inc., 
189 So. 3d
928 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Clerkin v. Kendall Town & Country Assocs., Ltd.,

535 So. 2d 288
(Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Cecile Resort, Ltd. v. Hokanson, 
729 So. 2d 446
(Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (noting that owner’s insistence that work be completed

the next day did not amount to exercise of control over project such that owner

owed a duty of care to an independent contractor).

      Affirmed.




                                        2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer