From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Adoptie v. S. Bell Tel. Tel. Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 8, 1983
426 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Summary

In Adoptie v. Southern Bell Tel Tel. Co., 426 So.2d 1162 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), a utility company was not held liable for injuries sustained due to an inoperable traffic signal to a motorist whose employees had cut the line.

Summary of this case from Fl. Power v. Goldberg

Opinion

Nos. 82-829, 82-830.

February 8, 1983.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Frederick N. Barad, J.

Horton, Perse Ginsberg and Edward Perse, Lawrence Rodgers, Miami, for appellants.

Shutts Bowen and Phillip J. Sheehe and Andrew L. Gordon; Steel, Hector Davis and Norman A. Coll and Andrew E. Grigsby, Miami, for appellees.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and FERGUSON, JJ.


Adoptie was injured in an intersection accident which was allegedly caused by the inoperability of the traffic light. He sued Florida Power Light and Southern Bell asserting that the defect resulted from the fact that, some time before, the work crews of either or both negligently cut the power line which supplied electricity to the signal. We affirm the dismissal of the complaint as against the appellees on the ground that their alleged conduct was, as a matter of law, not a legal cause of the plaintiff's damages. Pope v. Pinkerton-Hays Lumber Co., 120 So.2d 227 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960), cert. denied, 127 So.2d 441 (Fla. 1961); Cone v. Inter County Tel. Tel. Co., 40 So.2d 148 (Fla. 1949).

Affirmed.


I write to make it clear that my concurrence is based on the fact that any negligence on the part of the appellees was not a proximate cause of appellant's injuries because the authorities charged with maintenance of the light, see § 316.006, Fla. Stat. (1979), had actual or constructive notice that the power line had been cut and a period of about forty days passed before the accident in question occurred.


Summaries of

Adoptie v. S. Bell Tel. Tel. Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 8, 1983
426 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

In Adoptie v. Southern Bell Tel Tel. Co., 426 So.2d 1162 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), a utility company was not held liable for injuries sustained due to an inoperable traffic signal to a motorist whose employees had cut the line.

Summary of this case from Fl. Power v. Goldberg

In Adoptie v. Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co. and Florida Power and Light Co., 426 So.2d 1162, 1163 (Fla.App. 1983), Adoptie was injured in an intersection accident which was allegedly caused by the inoperability of the traffic signal.

Summary of this case from Logan v. Phillips
Case details for

Adoptie v. S. Bell Tel. Tel. Co.

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN FRANCISCO ADOPTIE, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS MOTHER AND NEXT…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Feb 8, 1983

Citations

426 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Citing Cases

Palm Beach-Broward v. Continental

This court has previously held that a power company does not owe a duty to a noncustomer who has been injured…

Logan v. Phillips

However, we have found several cases from other jurisdictions which are instructive. In Adoptie v. Southern…