A recent lawsuit claims that a local government failed to maintain safe conditions on public property, resulting in significant injuries to a resident. The complaint was filed by Sharon Crowe in the Circuit Court for the Sixth Judicial Circuit in Pinellas County, Florida, on February 11, 2026, naming the City of Dunedin as defendant.
According to court documents, Sharon Crowe alleges that on June 3, 2025, she tripped and fell over a chain draped low across an entranceway between the street and sidewalk near an open lot adjacent to the Dunedin Fine Art Center. The complaint states that this area is owned, maintained, or controlled by the City of Dunedin. Crowe claims that her injuries were caused directly by what she describes as negligent actions or omissions by city employees or agents responsible for maintaining public walkways.
The legal filing outlines several specific allegations against the city. It asserts that “Defendant, CITY OF DUNEDIN, owed Plaintiff, SHARON CROWE, a duty to exercise reasonable care for the safety of Plaintiff.” The complaint continues by listing multiple ways in which this duty was allegedly breached: “Negligently failed to maintain or adequately maintain the sidewalk area…by allowing a chain to be draped low across the entrance way,” “Negligently failed to inspect or adequately inspect the subject area…to correct the dangerous condition,” “Negligently failed to warn or adequately warn Plaintiff…of the danger when Defendant…knew or should have known of said danger,” and “Negligently failed to correct or repair…the dangerous condition when said dangerous condition was known to Defendant…or had existed for a sufficient length of time so that Defendant…should have known of it.”
Crowe’s complaint also emphasizes that she did not have prior knowledge—either actual or constructive—of what she describes as an unsafe condition at the site before her fall. She further asserts that she was not comparatively negligent in connection with her accident. The document details injuries described as “seriously and grievously injured, bruised, and contused in or about her arms, elbows, shoulders, head and face,” which are claimed to be “significant, permanent and continuing” or aggravations of previous conditions.
The filing notes that all required notifications under Florida law were made prior to bringing suit: “Plaintiff…provided Defendant…with timely written notice of her claims against it in accord with Section 768.28(6), Fla. Stat.” Copies of these notices are referenced as exhibits attached to the filing.
As part of her legal action, Crowe seeks damages greater than $50,000 exclusive of interest and costs. The complaint requests judgment against the City of Dunedin for these damages along with any other relief deemed appropriate by the court. In addition to financial compensation for medical expenses and pain and suffering already incurred and anticipated in future treatment needs, Crowe also demands a jury trial.
The document specifies compliance with procedural requirements regarding service via email under Florida Rules of Judicial Administration. It lists contact information for Tripp Law Firm attorneys representing Crowe: George Alan Tripp Jr., Esq., and R. Mark Bortner, Esq., both based at Seminole Boulevard in Seminole, Florida.
No judge is named explicitly within this filing. The case is identified as Case Number 26-000894-CI.
Source: 26000894CI_Sharon_Crowe_v_City_of_Dunedin_Complaint_Pinellas_County_Florida.pdf
