In a Florida premises liability appeal turning on actual or constructive notice, Eckert Realty Corp. v. Strazzeri, No. 4D2023-2130 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024), the Fourth District reversed the denial of a directed verdict for a building owner after an employee fell on a ramp she had used hundreds of times. A building-code slope violation alone, the court held, does not establish the owner’s notice of a dangerous condition.
Facts
Eckert Realty Corp. v. Ellen Strazzeri, No. 4D2023-2130, Fourth District Court of Appeal of Florida. Appellant/Defendant: Eckert Realty Corp.; Appellee/Plaintiff: Ellen Strazzeri.
Ellen Strazzeri, an employee at Deer Creek Real Estate in an office complex owned by Eckert Realty Corp., fell on a ramp she had used “hundreds of times” over four years. On the day of the incident, wearing wedge shoes with a 2.5-3 inch lift, she claimed an “uneven slope” caused her leg to twist, breaking her leg and ankle.
Expert John Szerdi testified the ramp’s slope (12% at the bottom, 10% at the top) exceeded ADA (5% for walking surfaces, 8.33% for ramps) and Florida Building Code standards. Edward Eckert testified the ramp, installed in 1999 by a certified contractor, passed inspections, had no prior fall incidents despite 1,856,000 traversals, and was part of a parking lot resurfaced every 5-6 years without issues noted.
Strazzeri sued Eckert for premises liability. At trial, Eckert moved for a directed verdict, arguing lack of evidence on causation and Eckert’s notice of the ramp’s danger; the motion was denied. The jury found Eckert 70% liable. Eckert renewed the motion post-verdict, which was denied, leading to this appeal.
On October 2, 2024, the Fourth District reversed the circuit court’s denial of Eckert’s motion for directed verdict and remanded the case, finding no evidence of actual or constructive notice.
Issue: Actual or Constructive Notice of the Ramp Hazard
Whether Eckert Realty Corp. had actual or constructive knowledge of a dangerous condition (the uneven ramp) that caused Strazzeri’s injuries, and whether sufficient evidence supported Eckert’s liability under premises liability law.
Holding
In premises liability cases, a plaintiff must demonstrate the defendant had actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition unless negligent maintenance is proven. Absent such evidence, and where the plaintiff’s knowledge of the condition equals or exceeds the defendant’s, the defendant is not liable, and a directed verdict is warranted.
Rationale
Florida law requires a premises owner to have actual or constructive notice of a hazard (Dudowicz v. Pearl on 63 Main, Ltd., 326 So. 3d 715 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)). Strazzeri provided no evidence Eckert knew or should have known the ramp was dangerous—inspections passed, no prior falls occurred, and Strazzeri herself navigated it hundreds of times.
While building code violations don’t require knowledge to establish a duty (Di Mare & Drews, Inc. v. Kerrigan, 810 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)), the owner must have superior knowledge of the hazard (Kerrigan, Warner, J., dissenting). Strazzeri’s extensive use of the ramp negated this.
No evidence of negligent maintenance (e.g., failure to inspect or repair) existed to bypass the actual or constructive notice requirement (Owens v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc., 802 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2001)).
The trial judge noted Strazzeri’s evidence was vague (“she’s walking and she falls”), insufficient to establish causation or Eckert’s liability, making a directed verdict appropriate.
Read the full opinion: Eckert Realty Corp. v. Strazzeri (Fla. 4th DCA 2024).
Why This Matters
Eckert is a reminder that actual or constructive notice remains the gatekeeper in Florida premises liability claims. A plaintiff’s expert can measure a slope, cite the ADA, and cite the Florida Building Code, but unless the record shows the owner knew or should have known the condition was dangerous, or negligently failed to inspect and maintain it, the case does not reach a jury. Twenty-five years without an incident, passed inspections, and the plaintiff’s own long familiarity with the ramp all cut against notice.
Practice point: for plaintiffs, build the notice record early, through prior complaints, incident reports, inspection logs, and maintenance history, rather than relying on a code violation to carry causation and notice at once. For owners and insurers, preserve the directed-verdict argument on actual or constructive notice at trial and renew it post-verdict, as Eckert did. If you are evaluating a Florida premises liability claim or defense, contact Cox Law, PLLC.
Listen to the Podcast
Listen to episode #4 of Cox Law Case Briefs, where we break down this premises liability case in plain language.
Transcript
The case summary above serves as the transcript for this podcast episode.
