Nova Southeastern University, Inc. v. Gross
Florida Supreme Court
758 So. 2d 86 (2000)
Facts
Gross (plaintiff) was a 23-year-old graduate student in a doctorate psychology program at Nova Southeastern University (defendant). As part of her doctorate program, Gross was required to complete an internship, called a practicum, at a certain location assigned by the university. To assign locations, the university provides a list of approved locations to students, who then select six locations they wish to be assigned. The university then assigns each student to one of the six locations chosen. Gross selected Family Services Agency, Inc. (FSA) as one of her six location choices, and the university ultimately assigned her to FSA. FSA was in a dangerous location, and the university was aware of several criminal incidents that had occurred near the FSA parking lot. One evening while leaving FSA, Gross was abducted, robbed, and assaulted by a man with a gun in the FSA parking lot. Gross filed a lawsuit against the university in federal district court, alleging that the university knew FSA was unreasonably dangerous and that it was negligent in assigning Gross to the location without adequate warning. The district court granted summary judgment to the university, and Gross appealed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth District certified a question of state law for the Florida Supreme Court to decide.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Quince, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 709,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
