Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 112.182 (2025)

“Firefighter rule” abolished.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

112.182 “Firefighter rule” abolished.—

(1) A firefighter or properly identified law enforcement officer who lawfully enters upon the premises of another in the discharge of his or her duty occupies the status of an invitee. The common-law rule that such a firefighter or law enforcement officer occupies the status of a licensee is hereby abolished.

(2) It is not the intent of this section to increase or diminish the duty of care owed by property owners to invitees. Property owners shall be liable to invitees pursuant to this section only when the property owner negligently fails to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition or negligently fails to correct a dangerous condition of which the property owner either knew or should have known by the use of reasonable care or negligently fails to warn the invitee of a dangerous condition about which the property owner had, or should have had, knowledge greater than that of the invitee.

History.—s. 1, ch. 90-308; s. 693, ch. 95-147.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 20 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2021 · leading case: Sepega v. DeLaura Concurrence, 167 A.3d 916 (Conn. 2017).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Sepega v. DeLaura Concurrence, 167 A.3d 916 (Conn. 2017). · cites it 3× “See Fla. Stat. Ann. § 112.182 (1) (West 2014); N.”

Potts v. Johnson, 654 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). · cites it 8× “Johnson moved for summary judgment arguing that Potts was illegally on the premises and thus was not entitled to the invitee status recently granted police officers lawfully on the premises pursuant to § 112.182, Florida Statutes (1990). After a hearing the trial court…”

Worth v. Eugene Gentile Builders, 697 So. 2d 945 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). · cites it 4× “3d DCA 1995)(§ 112.182, Fla.Stat.(1990) abolished the common law rule, the "firefighter rule," that firefighters and police officers upon the land of another while carrying out their official duties occupied the status of a mere licensee.”

Lodge v. Arett Sales Corp., 717 A.2d 215 (Conn. 1998). “The following states have also legislatively abolished the firefighter rule: Fla. Stat. Ann. § 112.182 (West 1992 and Sup.”

Minnich v. Med Waste, Inc., 564 S.E.2d 98 (S.C. 2002). “06 (West 2001) (the fireman’s rule shall not operate to deny any peace officer or public safety officer a recovery in any action at law or authorized by statute); Fla. Stat. Ann. § 112.182 (West 2001) (common-law firefighter’s rule abolished).”

Lanza v. Polanin, 581 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 1991). · cites it 2× “NOTES [1] At the outset, we note that the legislature has enacted § 112.182, Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1990), which effectively abolishes the fireman's rule by changing the status of a fire fighter or law enforcement officer lawfully on the premises of another from licensee to invitee.”

Bennis v. State Chem. Mfg. Co., 682 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). · cites it 4× “§ 112.182(1), Fla.Stat. (1995). Even applying the firefighter's rule, however, we conclude that the trial court erred in granting appellees summary judgment on the remaining counts.”

Hopkins v. Medeiros, 724 N.E.2d 336 (Mass. App. Ct. 2000). “See Fla. Stat. Ann. § 112.182 (West 1992) (effective 1990, rule changes status of police and firefighters to invitees and only applies to suits against property owners); Minn.”

Moody v. Delta W., Inc., 38 P.3d 1139 (Alaska 2002). “1989) (limited by Fla. Stat. Ann. § 112.182 ); Martin v. Gaither, 219 Ga.”

Labrie v. Pace Membership Warehouse, Inc., 678 A.2d 867 (R.I. 1996). “06 (1994); Fla.Stat.Ann. § 112.182 (West Supp.1996).”

Green v. Sch. Bd. of Pasco Cnty., 752 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). · cites it 2× “See § 112.182(a), Fla. Stat. (1997). Thus, the School Board owed him two alternative duties: one, to use ordinary care in keeping the premises in a reasonably safe condition, and, two, to give notice or warning of any latent perils known or which should be known to the owner,…”

Di Mare & Drews, Inc. v. Kerrigan, 810 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). · cites it 3× “5(f) and section 112.182(2), Florida Statutes (2000).”

Show all 20 citing cases →

— 112.182(1) — 1 case

Bennis v. State Chem. Mfg. Co., 682 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). “§ 112.182(1), Fla.Stat. (1995). Even applying the firefighter's rule, however, we conclude that the trial court erred in granting appellees summary judgment on the remaining counts.”

— 112.182(2) — 1 case

Di Mare & Drews, Inc. v. Kerrigan, 810 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). “5(f) and section 112.182(2), Florida Statutes (2000).”

— 112.182(a) — 1 case

Green v. Sch. Bd. of Pasco Cnty., 752 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). “See § 112.182(a), Fla. Stat. (1997). Thus, the School Board owed him two alternative duties: one, to use ordinary care in keeping the premises in a reasonably safe condition, and, two, to give notice or warning of any latent perils known or which should be known to the owner,…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.