HomeMy WebLinkAbout0243 f
1
1
from- east to west. Plaintiff's car was struck by a truck
which had run a red light. Serious injuries occurred and
plaintiff sued defendants, Citizens Federal Savings and
Loan Association and the corporation doing construction work
on the premises. Plaintiff's allegations were that the
driveway had ,been negligently designed and that the defendants
had failed to provide warning signs or other traffic control
devices at the entry of the highway.
The defendants filed motions for summary judgment.
Final summary judgment in favor of defendants was entered and
the order granting the motion does not recite the ground
therefor.
Our review of the record indicates that the clear
p roximate cause of plaintiff's accident was the truck on the
highway which ran the light. The record conclusively shows
that negligent design of the driveway, if any, was not the
legal cause of the eventual accident which occurred on the-
far side of this four-lane, divided highway. Proximate
cause means that the alleged wrong of the defendant caused
I
the damage plaintiff claims. Rosen v. Parkway General Hospital,
I Inc., 265 So.2d 93 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). There Host be such a -
natural,direct and continuous sequence between the ne li ent
g g
act and the injury that it can reasonably be said that but for
the act the injury would not have occurred. Sardell v. I~lalanio,
~ 202 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1967) . Here, even the safest of driveways
would not have saved plaintiff -from being struck by the truck which
ran the light.
~ Much of the argument before the trial court and on
~ brief before this court relates to the status of the plaintiff
while on the defendant's property. Defendants contend plaintiff
was a trespasser and plaintiff contends he was either a business
invitee or at least an uninvited licensee. We need not consider
-2-
d0~ ~ tA6E