Ezequiel Lugo and Eleanor Sills obtained a favorable decision in an appeal from a final summary judgment order determining that there was no evidence the defendants breached any duty owed to a person shot after business hours.
The plaintiff purchased a 50¢ cup of ice and then loitered in the parking lot past the business establishment’s closing hours. The plaintiff then got into a fist fight with another person, who later returned and shot the plaintiff.
The plaintiff filed a premises liability lawsuit against the tenant and the premises owner. The defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that the plaintiff was a trespasser or, at best, an uninvited licensee because he remained on the premises without an invitation and solely for his convenience. The trial court agreed that the plaintiff was not an invitee at the time of the shooting, and granted summary judgment because there was no evidence that the Defendants had breached the duties owed to an uninvited licensee or trespasser.
On appeal, the plaintiff claimed that summary judgment should have been denied because the material facts regarding the plaintiff’s status and the defendants’ duty were undisputed. Ezequiel and Eleanor argued on appeal that the undisputed facts showed that the plaintiff’s status changed to an uninvited licensee after he remained on the premises past closing hours despite posted “No Trespassing” and “No Loitering” signs. Ezequiel and Eleanor also argued that summary judgment was proper because the plaintiff had been the victim of a targeted attack that would have been impossible for the defendants to know about.
The Sixth District Court of Appeals rejected the plaintiff’s arguments, and affirmed without a written opinion. The appellate court also entered an order granting appellate attorneys’ fees for the defendants.
The case is McConico v. Liquor Master, Inc., 51 Fla. L. Weekly D1003 (Fla. 6th DCA 2026).
For additional information, contact Ezequiel Lugo or Eleanor Sills.
