Showing posts with label Slip and Fall. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Slip and Fall. Show all posts

Saturday, March 29, 2014

TN COA REVERSES DISMISSAL OF SLIP AND FALL CASE INVOLVING INADEQUATE LIGHTING

On November 30, 2010, Plaintiff Cynthia Christian was an invited guest for a function at Ms. Lassie's Lodge in Campbell County, Tennessee.  The Lodge was regularly rented for parties and other functions via the nearby Hampton Inn.  Ms. Christian arrived when it was still daylight, and the function ended after dark.

Before or during the function, an owner of The Lodge in charge of the event turned on some exterior lights.  However, the lights installed and  intended to illuminate the parking area and walkway leading to The Lodge were not operative.  As Ms. Christian walked from The Lodge to her car she stepped into a hole in the parking area which could not be seen in the dark.  She suffered personal injuries which resulted in more than $50,000 in medical expenses.  She later sued The Lodge for its negligence in failing to provide adequate lighting on the walkway and parking area for guests.

The Lodge asked the Circuit Court for Campbell County to dismiss the case claiming that: (1) it had no notice that the lights in question were out and (2) despite the lack of lighting Ms. Christian was more than 50 percent at fault for her fall and injuries.  In other words, the company who operated The Lodge for profit claimed that it had no idea its lights did not work and that if Ms. Christian could not see in the dark that was her problem.  The Lodge maintained this disingenuous defense even after The Lodge staff testified that: 1) the owner was in fact aware that the lights for the walkway and parking area were inoperative before the evening function; 2) they had no procedure for the inspection and maintenance of the exterior lights; and 3) the day after the fall and injury The Lodge staff inspected the lights and found as many as 14 exterior flood lights inoperative including those for the walkway and parking area.

Despite The Lodge's clear and actual notice of its inoperable lights, its failure to inspect or replace the lights, and the danger created by the lack of lighting, the Circuit Court inexplicably dismissed the case.  The Circuit Court found that there was insufficient evidence to show that The Lodge had notice of the lighting issue prior to Ms. Christian's fall - despite The Lodge's own apparent admission to the contrary.

Ms. Christian appealed, and on March 28, 2014, the Tennessee Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Circuit Court properly finding that a jury could reasonably find that : 1) The Lodge had actual notice of the inoperative lights, the associated danger and a duty to act reasonably to remedy the issue; and/or 2) the lighting problem existed long enough that The Lodge through reasonable care and diligence should have discovered the danger and replaced the lights.  The case was remanded for trial by jury on all issues. Read the full opinion here.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Court reviews whether defendant owed a legal duty to a plaintiff in a premises liability case

MARGARET A. NORFLEET v. PULTE HOMES TENNESSEE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP (Tenn. Ct. App. November 10, 2011)

While touring a model home in a new residential home development, the plaintiff fell when she failed to see a four-inch step as she walked from the foyer into the sunken living room. This premises liability action followed. The defendant constructed, owned, and managed the model home in which the plaintiff fell. Upon motion of the defendant, the trial court summarily dismissed the complaint upon two findings: that the defendant did not owe a legal duty to the plaintiff and that the plaintiff was more than fifty percent at fault. We affirm upon the finding that the plaintiff cannot establish that a duty was owed to her by the defendant.

Full opinion is available here:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/norfleetm_111011.pdf

Thursday, May 5, 2011

Court Reviews a Summary Judgment Ruling in a Slip and Fall Case

DAVID MACKLIN v. DOLLAR GENERAL CORPORATION, d/b/a DOLLAR GENERAL STORE #2311 (Tenn. Ct. App. May 4, 2011)



This is a premises liability case. The plaintiff slipped and fell on a clear liquid at the defendant's store. The defendant moved for summary judgment arguing it did not have a reasonable opportunity to clean the floor, warn the customer of the clear liquid, or take adequate precautionary measures upon receiving notice of the dangerous condition.

The trial court granted the motion and the plaintiff appealed. Having determined the defendant effectively moved for and received only partial summary judgment, we dismiss this appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 


Opinion may be found at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2011/macklind_050411.pdf

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

Court Reviews a Slip and Fall Case

KATHY GORDON v. BY-LO MARKETS, INC., D/B/A/ BY-LO #10 (Tenn. Ct. App. October 6, 2010)

Plaintiff, while delivering pizza to customers in the By-Lo grocery store, slipped and fell. She filed suit against By-Lo, claiming negligence. By-Lo moved for summary judgment and after a hearing on the matter, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of By-Lo and dismissed the suit. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/gordonk_100610.pdf

SUSANO, concurring:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/gordonk_CON_100610.pdf

Monday, June 28, 2010

Court reviews whether plaintiff adequately proved constructive notice in a slip and fall case

CALVIN BENN v. PUBLIC BUILDING AUTHORITY OF KNOX COUNTY, ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. June 28, 2010)

Plaintiff slipped off the sidewalk while removing trash during the course and scope of his employment with Knox County. Plaintiff sustained injuries to his hip and shoulder as a result of his fall. He then filed suit pursuant to the Government Tort Liability Act. After a bench trial, the trial court found that Plaintiff failed to prove constructive notice by a preponderance of the evidence and entered a judgment in favor of Defendants. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/bennc_062810.pdf

Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Court finds defendant did not have constructive notice of dangerous condition

LEITHA C. PERKINS and ROBERT L. PERKINS v. BIG LOTS STORES, INC.(Tenn. Ct. App. May 20, 2009)

This is a slip-and-fall case. The plaintiff tripped on a floor mat and fell as she was entering the defendant's store. A store security video showed that the corner of the floor mat was overturned by another customer twenty-one seconds before the plaintiff fell. At the time that the corner of the mat became furled, the assistant store manager was at the service desk several feet from the entrance. He denied seeing the overturned mat.

The plaintiff sued the store, alleging negligence in allowing a dangerous condition to persist and in failing to warn the plaintiff of it. After the trial, the jury found that the defendant store was eighty percent at fault and that the plaintiff was twenty percent at fault. The defendant store filed a motion for a new trial, alleging juror misconduct based on comments by jurors to the attorneys. The store also contended that the evidence showed that it did not have actual or constructive notice that the corner of the mat had become folded over. Finally, the store maintained that no reasonable jury could find that the plaintiff was less than fifty percent at fault for her own injuries. The trial court denied the motion and the defendant appeals. We reverse, finding no material evidence to support the jury's verdict, and dismiss the case.

The full text of this opinion may be found at the TBA website:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/perkinsl_052009.pdf

Friday, February 26, 2010

Court holds Defendant had no duty of care in wrongful death action

JOHNNY R. OWNBY ET AL. v. TENNESSEE FARMERS COOPERATIVE CORPORATION, U.S.A. (Tenn. Ct. App. May 18, 2009)

This wrongful death action arises out of an accident at an agricultural facility: a worker fell through a skylight on the roof while employed by a company hired by the agricultural facility owner to do work on the roof. The trial court denied the owner's motion for a directed verdict on the question of whether the owner owed a duty of care to the injured worker. We reverse the decision of the trial court because we have concluded that this case falls within an exception to the general duty of a landowner to provide a reasonably safe workplace.

The full text of this opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/ownbyj_051909.pdf

Thursday, January 28, 2010

TCA reverses lower court and dismisses slip and fall suit

LEITHA C. PERKINS and ROBERT L. PERKINS v. BIG LOTS STORES, INC. (Tenn. Ct. App September 16, 2008).

This is a slip-and-fall case. The plaintiff tripped on a floor mat and fell as she was entering the defendant's store. A store security video showed that the corner of the floor mat was overturned by another customer twenty-one seconds before the plaintiff fell. At the time that the corner of the mat became furled, the assistant store manager was at the service desk several feet from the entrance. He denied seeing the overturned mat. The plaintiff sued the store, alleging negligence in allowing a dangerous condition to persist and in failing to warn the plaintiff of it. After the trial, the jury found that the defendant store was eighty percent at fault and that the plaintiff was twenty percent at fault. The defendant store filed a motion for a new trial, alleging juror misconduct based on comments by jurors to the attorneys. The store also contended that the evidence showed that it did not have actual or constructive notice that the corner of the mat had become folded over. Finally, the store maintained that no reasonable jury could find that the plaintiff was less than fifty percent at fault for her own injuries. The trial court denied the motion and the defendant appeals. We reverse, finding no material evidence to support the jury's verdict, and dismiss the case.

The full text of this opinion may be found at the TBA website.
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2009/perkinsl_052009.pdf