Case Name: Roosevelt BOGAN, parent and natural guardian of Raymond Bogan, Appellant, v. Carl T. HOFFMAN, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1973-06-28
Citations: 279 So. 2d 395
Docket Number: No. R-228
Parties: Roosevelt BOGAN, parent and natural guardian of Raymond Bogan, Appellant, v. Carl T. HOFFMAN, Appellee.
Judges: SPECTOR, C. J., and RAWLS, J., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 279
Pages: 395–396

Head Matter:
Roosevelt BOGAN, parent and natural guardian of Raymond Bogan, Appellant, v. Carl T. HOFFMAN, Appellee.
No. R-228.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
June 28, 1973.
James E. Hertz, of Fisher, Hertz & Bell, Pensacola, and James W.' Middleton, Fort Walton Beach, for appellant.
Joe J. Harrell, of Harrell, Wiltshire, Bozeman, Clark & Stone, Pensacola, for appellee.

Opinion:
JOHNSON, Judge.
Appellant seeks reversal of a final judgment, entered pursuant to a directed verdict in favor of appellee, in a wrongful death action instituted by appellant.
The appellant's complaint alleged that ap-pellee dredged a large hole in the navigable waters of Pensacola Bay, adjacent to a wayside park, and negligently failed to place warning devices for swimmers and created a nuisance. Appellant further alleged that as a result thereof his nine-year old son, while swimming in the waters, stepped off in the hole dredged by appel-lee and was drowned.
At the jury trial, appellee testified that he had obtained the proper permits for dredging and that the place where the dredging took place was not the place where the child had drowned. Photographs were admitted into evidence and appellant contended that said exhibits show where the child drowned and that the drowning took place in the dredged area. Appellee contended that the area in which the dredging took place was not depicted on the photograph and, therefore, the place where the drowning occurred was not the place that was dredged. After appellant presented his evidence and testimony, the trial court, upon motion, directed a verdict in favor of appellee.
After fully reviewing all the evidence in this record, we agree that the trial judge was correct in finding that no sufficient evidence was submited on which the jury could legally find for the plaintiff.
Appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error in the proceedings below, the judgment appealed herein is accordingly affirmed.
SPECTOR, C. J., and RAWLS, J., concur.