Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 768.075 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 768.075 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 768.075

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title XLV
TORTS
Chapter 768
NEGLIGENCE
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 768.075
768.075 Immunity from liability for injury to trespassers on real property.
(1) A person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property, or an agent of such person or organization, shall not be held liable for any civil damages for death of or injury or damage to a trespasser upon the property when such trespasser was under the influence of alcoholic beverages with a blood-alcohol level of 0.08 percent or higher, when such trespasser was under the influence of any chemical substance set forth in s. 877.111, when such trespasser was illegally under the influence of any substance controlled under chapter 893, or if the trespasser is affected by any of the aforesaid substances to the extent that her or his normal faculties are impaired. However, the person or organization owning or controlling the interest in real property shall not be immune from liability if gross negligence or intentional misconduct on the part of such person or organization or agent thereof is a proximate cause of the death of or injury or damage to the trespasser.
(2) A person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property, or an agent of such person or organization, is not liable for any civil damages for the death of or injury or damage to any discovered or undiscovered trespasser, except as provided in paragraphs (3)(a), (b), and (c), and regardless of whether the trespasser was intoxicated or otherwise impaired.
(3)(a) As used in this subsection, the term:
1. “Invitation” means that the visitor entering the premises has an objectively reasonable belief that he or she has been invited or is otherwise welcome on that portion of the real property where injury occurs.
2. “Discovered trespasser” means a person who enters real property without invitation, either express or implied, and whose actual physical presence was detected, within 24 hours preceding the accident, by the person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property or to whose actual physical presence the person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property was alerted by a reliable source within 24 hours preceding the accident. The status of a person who enters real property shall not be elevated to that of an invitee, unless the person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property has issued an express invitation to enter the property or has manifested a clear intent to hold the property open to use by persons pursuing purposes such as those pursued by the person whose status is at issue.
3. “Undiscovered trespasser” means a person who enters property without invitation, either express or implied, and whose actual physical presence was not detected, within 24 hours preceding the accident, by the person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property.
(b) To avoid liability to undiscovered trespassers, a person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property must refrain from intentional misconduct that proximately causes injury to the undiscovered trespasser, but has no duty to warn of dangerous conditions. To avoid liability to discovered trespassers, a person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property must refrain from gross negligence or intentional misconduct that proximately causes injury to the discovered trespasser, and must warn the trespasser of dangerous conditions that are known to the person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property but that are not readily observable by others.
(c) This subsection shall not be interpreted or construed to alter the common law as it pertains to the “attractive nuisance doctrine.”
(4) A person or organization owning or controlling an interest in real property, or an agent of such person or organization, shall not be held liable for negligence that results in the death of, injury to, or damage to a person who is attempting to commit a felony or who is engaged in the commission of a felony on the property.
History.s. 1, ch. 90-140; s. 1161, ch. 97-102; s. 19, ch. 99-225.

F.S. 768.075 on Google Scholar

F.S. 768.075 on Casetext

Amendments to 768.075


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 768.075
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 768.075.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 768.075

Total Results: 13

PRIDE OF ST. LUCIE LODGE 1189, INC. d/b/a TEMPLE 853 v. TEAIRA NICOLE REED

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2020-11-03T23:53:00-08:00

Snippet: court erred in denying its request for a section 768.075(4), Florida Statutes (2016), “felony defense” instruction…Lodge sought an instruction pursuant to section 768.075(4), Florida Statutes, which provides: A …commission of a felony on the property. § 768.075(4), Fla. Stat. (2016). The Lodge argued that there…that “[t]he legislature . . . has enacted section 768.075(4), which prevents a property owner from being …addition to not being sufficiently pled, the section 768.075(4) defense did not apply because the Decedent was

Arp v. Waterway East Ass'n

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2017-04-26T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 217 So. 3d 117, 2017 WL 1496269, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5793

Snippet: portion of the real property where injury occurs.” § 768.075(3)(a)l., Fla. Stat. (2011). However, erecting “…trespasser” or an “undiscovered trespasser.” § 768.075(3)(a)2. & 3., Fla. Stat. (2011). An “undiscovered…or controlling an interest in real property.” § 768.075(3)(a)3., Fla. Stat. (2011). Nonetheless, when a…likewise decline to reach that issue. . Section 768.075(3), Florida Statutes (2011), which in certain circumstances

Denise Nicholson v. Stonybrook Apartments, LLC, d/b/a Summit Housing Partners, LLC

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2015-01-07T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 154 So. 3d 490, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 183

Snippet: plaintiffs status to the land. Id. Section 768.075 of the Florida Statutes provides that “[a] person… discovered or undiscovered trespasser.... ” § 768.075(2), Fla. Stat. (2013). However, To avoid liability…that are not readily observable by others. § 768.075(3)(b), Fla. Stat. (2013). Put succinctly, in a

Ryan v. National Marine Manufacturers Ass'n

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2012-12-19T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 103 So. 3d 1001, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21660, 2012 WL 6602861

Snippet: liable for Collins’ death, pursuant to section 768.075(1), Florida Statutes (2009), which provides: a …higher....2 (Emphasis added). Ryan argued section 768.075 did not apply because NMMA and Beguiristain were…are entitled to the immunity provided by section 768.075, Florida Statutes.3 Ryan argues that because the… and address only the applicability of section 768.075. . Though not directly relevant to our decision

Kuria v. BMLRW, LLLP

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2012-12-05T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 101 So. 3d 425, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20811, 2012 WL 6029107

Snippet: challenges the trial court’s finding that section 768.075(4), Florida Statute (2007), shields property owners…and dismissed the action on the basis of section 768.075(4), Florida Statutes, which provides: A person …the provision in relevant part as “amending s. 768.075, F.S.; ... providing immunity from certain liability

Chhouri v. Chhouri

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2008-11-05T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 2 So. 3d 987, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 16963, 2008 WL 4790970

Snippet: ordered to pay $10,000 in attorney's costs, $10,768.75 in accountant fees, and $10,000 in costs to retain

Sierra v. Sunshine Developers, LLC

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2008-10-22T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 994 So. 2d 424, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 16324, 2008 WL 4643325

Snippet: PER CURIAM. Affirmed. § 768.075, Fla. Stat. (2006). No. 3D07-2847 District Court of

Quarantello v. Leroy

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2008-02-14T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 977 So. 2d 648

Snippet: not liable for any action or omission"); § 768.075(1), Fla. Stat. (2007) (employing the phrase, "

Byers v. Radiant Group, LLC

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2007-10-19T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 966 So. 2d 506

Snippet: should receive an instruction based on section 768.075(4), Florida Statutes (2003). I am inclined to believe… The legislature, however, has enacted section 768.075(4), which prevents a property owner from being …others). Accordingly, the application of section 768.075(4) to Mr. Byers' claim presents a jury issue…tort law is partially incorporated into section 768.075(4), which prevents proprietors from being held … 583 So.2d 1070 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). See also § 768.075, Fla. Stat. (2003) (limiting the liability of &

Poe v. IMC PHOSPHATES MP, INC.

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2004-10-15T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 885 So. 2d 397

Snippet: § 36, at 1428, Laws of Fla. (amending section 768.075). [4] In Drady, this court cited to the version

Fleetwood Homes of Florida, Inc. v. Reeves

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2002-12-26T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 833 So. 2d 857

Snippet: for such conduct in construction contracts); § 768.075(1), Fla. Stat. (2001) (duty owed by property owner

State v. FLORIDA CONNSUMRE ACTION NETWORK

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2002-10-09T00:53:00-07:00

Citation: 830 So. 2d 148

Snippet: by convenience-store owners; amending section 768.075, restricting the liability of possessors of land…placing caps on punitive damages; amending section 768.075, concerning trespassers' liability; amending

Ex parte Davidson

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1918-08-13T00:00:00-07:00

Citation: 76 Fla. 272, 79 So. 727, 1918 Fla. LEXIS 311

Snippet: differs essentially from In re Robinson, 73 Fla. 768, 75 South. Rep. 604. In the Robinson case the statute