Mary Abarca, Appellant, v. LLC (2025)

Affirmed. See Earley v. Morrison Cafeteria Co. of Orlando, 61 So. 2d 477, 478 (Fla. 1952) (stating that it is “well settled that the proprietor has a right to assume that the invitee will perceive that which would be obvious to him upon the ordinary use of his own senses”); Brookie v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 213 So. 3d 1129, 1133 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (holding that trial court properly entered summary judgment in favor of premises owner where empty pallet located by store's exit on which plaintiff tripped and fell “was open and obvious and not inherently dangerous” and previously observed by plaintiff); Smith v. Westdale Asset Mgmt., Ltd., 353 So. 3d 108, 111 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022) (“Generally, a business owes no duty to warn an invitee of an open and obvious condition when the business's ‘knowledge’ of the condition is not superior to that of the invitee.”); TruGreen Landcare, LLC v. LaCapra, 254 So. 3d 628, 631 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018) (“[S]ome conditions are considered so obvious and not inherently dangerous that they do not, as a matter of law, support liability for the breach of the duty to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition.”).

PER CURIAM.