From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brogdon v. Brown

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 7, 1987
505 So. 2d 19 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

Opinion

No. 85-2760.

April 7, 1987.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Jon I. Gordon, J.

James C. Blecke and Susan S. Lerner, Miami, for appellants/cross-appellees.

Gaebe Murphy and Michael A. Mullen, Coral Gables, for appellees/cross-appellants.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and JORGENSON, JJ.


Appellant Alvin Brogdon was injured in a fall into an unguarded stairwell while working on appellee Brown's construction site. The Brogdons' negligence action resulted in the entry of final judgment for defendants/appellees pursuant to a jury verdict which found Brown not negligent in providing Brogdon a safe place to work.

Appellants contend that the trial court committed reversible error in refusing to instruct the jury that a violation of sections 3317 and 3312 of The South Florida Building Code was negligence per se.

Section 3312 of The South Florida Building Code states in part:
All floor openings used as stairways, or for the accommodations of ladders or runways, shall be guarded by railings and toe boards.
Section 3317.1, entitled "Railings," provides in part:
Railings, when required during construction, shall comply with the Standards of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), Part 1926, as set forth in Section 402 of Code, and as provided herein.

We hold that the trial court properly declined to give the negligence per se instruction because the code that was violated was enacted for the protection of the general public, not for the protection of a particular class of persons, therefore such violation was only evidence of negligence and not negligence per se. See Cadillac Fairview of Florida, Inc. v. Cespedes, 468 So.2d 417 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 479 So.2d 117 (Fla. 1985); Grand Union Co. v. Rocker, 454 So.2d 14 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Schulte v. Gold, 360 So.2d 428 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 368 So.2d 1367 (Fla. 1979). The jury was properly instructed to consider the code violations as evidence of negligence.

In view of our holding, we decline to address the point raised on cross-appeal, which has been rendered moot.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Brogdon v. Brown

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 7, 1987
505 So. 2d 19 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)
Case details for

Brogdon v. Brown

Case Details

Full title:ALVIN BROGDON AND GEORGIA BROGDON, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS/CROSS-APPELLEES…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Apr 7, 1987

Citations

505 So. 2d 19 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

Citing Cases

Morowitz v. Vistaview Apartments

We agree with Morowitz that the refusal to give the evidence of negligence instruction was error. A…

Adamo v. Manatee Condominium, Inc.

The Florida Appellate decisions generally pertain to the use of OSHA regulations as the "community standard",…