Charles M. Harris

Etheredge v. Walt Disney World Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008-12-05 · cited 19×

The case involved a negligence lawsuit by a fifteen-year-old plaintiff who injured her ankle in a storm drain at Walt Disney World's Downtown Disney complex after being directed to cross the street by a Disney crossing guard. The plaintiff claimed Disney was negligent in its mode of operation by channeling and directing guests to cross at a location with limited pedestrian safety, rather than alleging any defect in the drain itself. The trial court granted Disney a directed verdict after the plaintiff's case, finding insufficient evidence of negligence. The appellate court reversed, holding that evidence of the parking layout, landscaping, and crossing guard's directions could allow a reasonable jury to find that Disney breached its duty of reasonable care by creating a foreseeable risk, making the issues of breach and causation questions for the jury rather than appropriate for directed verdict. The court remanded for a new trial.

torts & liabilityprocedure

Mordenti v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008-02-22 · cited 2×

In this case, Michael Mordenti was convicted of first-degree murder for a third time based primarily on the testimony of Gail Mordenti Milligan, who claimed she arranged the murder-for-hire on behalf of the victim's husband, Larry Royston. The central issue was whether the trial court properly excluded testimony from Royston's attorney about statements Royston made before his suicide, including identifying someone else and denying any involvement by Mordenti. The majority of the District Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in excluding this evidence on grounds of hearsay and attorney-client privilege, because any privilege had been waived or eliminated by the State's prior ex parte disclosure and the statements implicated core constitutional rights in determining guilt. The court therefore reversed the conviction and remanded for further proceedings. A dissent argued that the privilege protected the statements and would have affirmed the conviction.

criminal lawprocedure

Pankow v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005-02-11 · cited 3×

Lopes v. Lopes

District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003-08-22 · cited 6×

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COM. v. Titusville Total Health Care

District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003-05-02 · cited 2×

Naylor v. District Board of Trustees

District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003-03-14 · cited 1×

Affiliations

Decision record

Charles M. Harris

Decision record

Affiliations