A bowling alley’s negligence may cause you to slip, fall and get hurt. If so, you may have a case to recover your damages.
Let’s take a look at some Florida bowling alley slip and fall cases. It will help you understand slip and fall cases against Florida bowling alleys.
Kitchen v. Ebonite Recreation Ctrs., Inc., 856 So. 2d 1083, 1085 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)
In Kitchen, Kay Ann Kitchen sued Ebonite Recreation Centers, a bowling alley. The Fifth District Court of Appeal is made up of Hernando, Lake, Marion, Citrus and Sumter Counties; Flagler, Putnam, St. Johns and Volusia Counties; Orange and Osceola Counties; and Brevard and Seminole Counties. The bowling alley was likely located in one of these counties.
Kitchen filed a personal injury lawsuit against Ebonite asserting a claim of premises liability. She sought damages for injuries which she sustained when she slipped and fell on wax at its bowling alley.
She said that she saw the grease looking substance on the floor before her fall. The claims adjuster probably cut the full value of the case in half for this fact.
The appeals court said that Kitchen’s testimony was sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact as to Ebonite’s liability. See Troya v. Miami Beach Health Care Group, Inc., 780 So.2d 228 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). This means that the appeals court let her case to trial.
I talk more about the Kitchen case in my Florida bowling alley slip and fall injury claim article.
Schmidt v. Bowl America Florida, Inc., 358 So.2d 1385 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
Schmidt sued Bowl America Florida. Schmidt is an old case, but it is still good law. Florida’s 4th DCA handled the appeal. It handles appeals from Palm Beach, Broward, St. Lucie, Martin, Indian River, and Okeechobee Counties. The 4th DCA is located in West Palm Beach, Florida.
In fact, the 2015 case of Garcia v. Wal-Mart Stores East, LP, Dist. Court, MD Florida 2015, cited the Schmidt case. Garcia involved a slip and fall on clear water at a Kissimmee, Florida Walmart. (Learn about Florida Walmart slip and fall injury claims).
Back to the Schmidt case…
Facts of the Schmidt case
In Schmidt, A Winter Park lawyer represented the injured man. A Orlando attorney defended the bowling alley.
Richard Schmidt sued for damages against Bowl America Florida, Inc. resulting from a slip and fall while bowling. (In Florida, Bowl America is located in Jacksonville and Orange Park).
The trial court said that the plaintiff “did not see the yellow marking crayon … until after he slipped on it.” In this case, the plaintiff is the injured man.
The bowling alley allowed “moonlight bowling” so called because the main lights over the bowling approachways and lanes are turned off. The “grease pencils” used in scoring are yellow and similar in color to the floor coloring.
Tip: If the dangerous condition that you slip on is similar in color to the floor coloring, it helps the case. This is because less blame may be placed on the injured person.
If less blame is put on the victim, then for settlement purposes the “full value” of the case is decreased less. This may result in a higher settlement value.
The bowling alley issued, replaced and collected the special marking pencils used for scoring. On the day in question, the lanes and approachways were swept at approximately 6:00 P.M. and not after.
Later, the Presbyterian Bowling League used Lane 7 from 7:00 P.M. to 10:00 P.M., at which time all lights were on. Moonlight bowling later began and the man begin bowling at 11:30 P.M.
No other bowlers had bowled on Lane 7 after the Presbyterian Bowling League completed its play. Immediately after his fall, he discovered a streak of marking crayon on the approach way at the exit where he fell.
A similar streak was found on the bottom of his shoe.
What Duties does a Florida Bowling Alley Owe a Bowler?
The bowling alley owes a bowler the duty to exercise reasonable care to maintain the alley in a safe condition and to guard against subjecting him to known dangerous conditions or those that reasonably might have been foreseen. Nance v. Ball, 134 So.2d 35 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1961).
The man agrees that the bowling alley did not have actual knowledge of the dangerous condition.
Nonetheless, a business establishment may still be held liable for injuries, if the dangerous condition on the floor has existed for a sufficient length of time to charge the owner with constructive knowledge, Montgomery v. Jitney Jungle Stores, Inc., 281 So.2d 302 (Fla. 1973).
After this case, Winn Dixie bought Jingle Jitney. Learn about Winn Dixie slip and fall injury cases in Florida.
The proof may be direct or circumstantial. The case should be allowed to go to the jury if the facts are reasonably susceptible of conflicting inferences.
In Schmidt, the appeals court allowed the case to go to the jury since there existed sufficient circumstances to warrant allowing a jury to determine whether a reasonable time for discovery of the dangerous condition existed. Jenkins v. Bracklin, 171 So.2d 589 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1965). Jenkins was a slip and fall lawsuit against a Florida store.
Evidence that no inspection had been made during a particular period of time prior to an accident may warrant an inference that the dangerous condition existed long enough so that the exercise of reasonable care would have resulted in discovery. Jenkins, supra.
In Lee v. The Southland Corporation, 253 So.2d 268 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1971), the plaintiff was injured when she slipped and fell in front of the defendant’s store.
The District Court of Appeal let the jury decide the case. It said:
“The jury could have found as a reasonable inference that the gummed tape in question had been utilized by Southland in a previous delivery of merchandise to the store; in which event, by its very nature, it could have constituted a hazard for customers or others walking into or out of the store.
This is not to even infer that such was actually the case or that the jury would necessarily have so found. It is simply to say that such was within the orbit of legal possibility.”
The Schmidt case was allowed to go to trial. I do not know whether the injured man settled before trial, or if he won at trial.
Call Us Now!
Call us now at (888) 594-3577 to find out for FREE if we can represent you. We answer calls 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year.
No Fees or Costs if We Do Not Get You Money
We speak Spanish. We invite you to learn more about us.