226 results for 'cat:"Premises Liability"'.
J. Graves finds the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of Michaels. The customer brought this negligence suit after slipping and falling inside the store on a rainy day. The customer's declaration, photos, testimony, as well as a security video not showing the area where the customer slipped, did not create a genuine dispute of material fact as to notice. A statement recounted by the customer from an unidentified staff member regarding how the staff had been mopping up water all day is hearsay. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Graves , Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 23-30393, Categories: Evidence, Negligence, premises Liability
J. Stagel improperly granted a patron final judgment in this negligent security arising from a shooting at a strip club. The property owner and his corporate entity argues they lacked control over the premises since it is leased to another business to establish duty of care. Based on evidence the owner and his entity did not maintain control over the premises and should have had entry of direct verdict. Reversed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Stagel, Filed On: April 4, 2024, Case #: 6D23-1205, Categories: Negligence, premises Liability
J. Kelly finds the court of appeals improperly ruled in favor of a timeshare resort in a premises liability case filed against it by a family that was injured in a deck collapse. The trial court granted the timeshare's motion for summary judgment, finding the family were trespassers under the law and were owed no duty of care because they were guests of the owners of the timeshare. Despite not being the owners of the timeshare, they still had a right to be present on the property. Therefore, the trial court erred in finding they were trespassers. Reversed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Kelly, Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: 03-22-00498-CV, Categories: Property, premises Liability, Contract
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Wiley finds that the trial court properly granted summary judgment to a hotel on a guest's negligence claim for cuts caused when a handheld shower wand broke. The guest failed to establish that the hotel was on notice that the shower wand was broken, and her expert's declaration had speculative conclusions that lacked foundation. Affirmed.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Viramontes, Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: B320603, Categories: Negligence, Experts, premises Liability
J. Caldwell finds that the lower court improperly dismissed premises liability claims brought against a hospital after plaintiff tripped on a dislodged cobblestone because plaintiff was not required to file a certificate of merit within one year of injury since his suit concerned trip and fall liability rather than medical malpractice. Reversed.
Court: Kentucky Court Of Appeals, Judge: Caldwell, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 2023-CA-0583-MR, Categories: Civil Procedure, premises Liability
J. Eagles grants a hotel’s motion to dismiss personal injury claims brought by a guest after she slipped on water and broke her hip. The guest had reported to staff that water was collecting under the air conditioning unit in her room, but they failed to fix the unit. At night, the guest got up and slipped on the water, breaking her hip. As the injury happened on St. Maarten, and the parties agreed to litigate in St. Maarten, this court lacks jurisdiction over the action.
Court: USDC Middle District of North Carolina, Judge: Eagles, Filed On: March 29, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1048, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Negligence, Jurisdiction, premises Liability
J. Underhill grants Walmart's motion for summary judgment, ruling that although it had an easement and paid for maintenance expenses on the parking lot where the pothole was located, it was not the owner of the property and, therefore, cannot be held liable for the shopper's injuries.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Underhill, Filed On: March 27, 2024, Case #: 3:22cv408, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Evidence, premises Liability
J. Swan finds the superior court properly affirmed an arbitration award in favor of the business owner in the citizen's lawsuit claiming he was injured falling out of a defective chair at the business. The superior court did not err when it stayed the lawsuit pending arbitration, and the citizen has waived his right to argue that the owner waived its right to arbitration by litigating and delaying his lawsuit. Affirmed.
Court: Virgin Islands Supreme Court, Judge: Swan, Filed On: March 25, 2024, Case #: 2024 VI 14, Categories: Arbitration, premises Liability, Contract
J. Jay finds the trial court properly decided Dollar General was not entitled to a directed verdict in the consumer's slip-and-fall case, as a reasonable jury could have reached the conclusion that Dollar General employees knew about the wet floor that caused the consumer to fall. Affirmed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Jay, Filed On: March 22, 2024, Case #: 22-2906, Categories: premises Liability
Per curiam, the Michigan Supreme Court finds that a landowner was not liable for the death of a 12-year-old girl who had been riding an off-road vehicle on his property because the mother's owner liability claim was precluded by the Michigan Recreational Land Use Act, and the record did not support a finding that the landowner was grossly negligent with regard to the death. Affirmed.
Court: Michigan Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 164190, Categories: Negligence, premises Liability
J. England grants, in part, Walmart’s motion for summary judgment in this slip-and-fall case brought by a customer claiming of negligence and wantonness. The customer argues that Walmart the broken tile should have been discovered by employees as it was part of the premises creating a hazard. Her testimony and evidence support the defect, the piece of tile was present and the reason for her fall. Therefore, the wantonness claim is dismissed and the remaining claim for negligence is denied. The parties are ordered to confer and file a joint status report regarding the next steps.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: England, Filed On: March 20, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv643, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Evidence, Negligence, premises Liability
J. Boatwright finds the trial court improperly granted summary judgment to the homeowner in the lawn services company employee's slip-and-fall lawsuit claiming he stepped on dark-colored algae on the homeowner's deck and fell while at the home to apply herbicide and fertilizer. There are genuine disputes of fact over whether the homeowner properly maintained his deck and warned others of its condition, as well as whether the employee was technically injured while performing his contracted work, so summary judgment was inappropriate and the case is remanded for further proceedings. Reversed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Boatwright, Filed On: March 15, 2024, Case #: 23-0324, Categories: premises Liability
J. Casper partially denies motions to dismiss brought forth by insurance companies against a representative of an estate suing them after her husband, the decedent, was killed due to injuries from a workplace accident and the insurance companies denied the representative’s request for coverage at their full policy limits. The statute of limitations isn’t based on when it became clear to the representative that the insurance companies were liable, but rather upon the insurance companies’ failure to respond to the representative’s settlement demands.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Casper, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv11594, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Wrongful Death, premises Liability
[Consolidated.] J. Mercier finds that the trial court improperly granted the customers' motions for spoliation sanctions in premises liability actions against the convenience store arising after customers were attacked and injured by an assailant while shopping. The customers alleged the store committed spoliation by failing to preserve surveillance footage showing time periods before the attacks. The trial court applied an incorrect standard of review in considering the customers' motions and considered evidence in the light most favorable to the customers rather than the store. Vacated.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Mercier, Filed On: March 13, 2024, Case #: A23A1597, Categories: Sanctions, premises Liability
[Consolidated.] J. Rickman finds that the trial court improperly failed to grant a directed verdict in the apartment complex owners' favor on all of the mother's theories of liability in a premises liability action brought by the mother after her son was fatally shot inside a leased apartment by another child. The complex owners fully parted with possession of the apartment and are not liable for the negligence of the parent who left a loaded gun around her unsupervised child. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Rickman, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: A23A1387, Categories: premises Liability
J. Manasco grants a mortgage company’s motion for summary judgment in this personal injury lawsuit brought by a couple after the husband was injured when the brick on the stairs collapsed, causing him to fall and land on a stake sticking up out of the ground. The couple claims negligence, wantonness and loss of consortium, but lack enough evidence of the mortgagor’s culpable knowledge on any of those claims.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Manasco, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv1417, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Evidence, Negligence, premises Liability
J. Winchester finds the court of civil appeals improperly reversed the trial court's summary judgment in favor of the swimming pool owner. The mother seeks recovery from her child's drowning by a fall into her neighbor's pool. Though the trial court found the owner to have no duty of care, the appeals court concluded the question of whether or not the swimming pool was an attractive nuisance was for the jury to decide. The swimming pool is not defined as an attractive nuisance being there was no hidden or unusual element of danger in or near it. A genuine issue of material fact remains, though, as to whether the owner breached a duty owed under premises liability. Vacated.
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court, Judge: Winchester, Filed On: March 12, 2024, Case #: 119,569, Categories: Negligence, Wrongful Death, premises Liability
J. Ho finds the district court properly found in favor of World Wrestling Entertainment on a spectator's allegations he was injured at an event and is not bound to the arbitration agreement printed on his ticket because it was a gift from his nephew. Any individual who permits a third-party to present a ticket for admittance to an event on his behalf is bound by the terms and conditions governing the use of the ticket. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Ho , Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 23-10491, Categories: Arbitration, premises Liability, Contract
J. Reynolds Fitzgerald finds that the lower court properly dismissed personal injury claims brought after a delivery driver tripped and fell at a restaurant while trying to move a kayak paddle he saw on the floor because the paddle constituted an open, obvious obstacle that was not inherently dangerous. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Reynolds Fitzgerald, Filed On: March 7, 2024, Case #: CV-22-2207, Categories: premises Liability
J. Stafford finds the lower court properly found in favor of a store in a premises liability matter. A customer fell as she entered the store, breaking her hip. It was raining and store personnel placed a mat and wet floor sign at the store entrance. Video surveillance footage showed the customer shuffle across the mat and fall. The customer's original complaint alleged she slipped on the wet floor, but the store argued that she tripped over her own feet as she shuffled across the mat; the customer amended her complaint to claim the wet mat caused the fall. The lower court found the customer presented no evidence that the mat caused the fall and that her original claim was unsupported as video evidence showed she fell while on the mat, never having an opportunity to slip on the floor. On appeal, the customer argues the lower court erred in its decision because it did not view the full video surveillance video, but the lower court informed the parties it was unable to due to technical difficulty, and the customer failed to object, thereby waiving her argument. Affirmed.
Court: Tennessee Court of Appeals, Judge: Stafford, Filed On: March 6, 2024, Case #: E2023-00702-COA-R3-CV, Categories: Evidence, Negligence, premises Liability
J. Bennett finds the lower court properly granted summary judgment to a company that operated a prison and denied a request for sanctions in this premises liability matter. A woman sued the prison operator after she was allegedly injured after a chair in which she was sitting while visiting her son collapsed beneath her. The lower court found the visitor failed to present evidence to show that the chair was defective, that there was a dangerous condition, or that the prison operator had knowledge or notice of the alleged dangerous condition. While the visitor requested sanctions against the prison operator for failing to preserve evidence, the lower court declined the request finding there was no indication after the incident that evidence would need to be preserved as the visitor indicated she was fine and declined all offers of assistance by prison personnel. The instant court finds no error in the lower court’s findings. Affirmed.
Court: Tennessee Court of Appeals, Judge: Bennett, Filed On: March 6, 2024, Case #: M2023-00424-COA-R3-CV, Categories: Sanctions, Negligence, premises Liability