123 results for 'cat:"Negligence" AND cat:"Premises Liability"'.
J. Land finds that the trial court improperly refused to rule in favor of the homeowners in a negligence action brought by the mail carrier arising from injuries she suffered after slipping on a pile of leaves and falling down the homeowners' front steps while delivering a package. The mail carrier failed to show that the homeowners had superior knowledge of the allegedly hazardous condition of their porch. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Land, Filed On: September 8, 2023, Case #: A23A1122, Categories: negligence, premises Liability
J. Palafox finds a lower court ruled correctly in denying Whataburger’s efforts to dismiss, on Texas Citizens Protection Act grounds, a lawsuit brought by a customer who said was rear-ended in a Whataburger drive-thru, leading to a physical altercation. The customer said Whataburger had failed to handle the situation properly in a number of ways, including by allegedly failing to adequately train employees or maintain security. Whataburger argued it was immune in the suit under the Act, which protects the right of free association and speech in Texas, but the consumer asserts negligence and liability claims that are not covered under the TCPA. Affirmed.l
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Palafox, Filed On: September 7, 2023, Case #: 08-23-00017-CV, Categories: Damages, negligence, premises Liability
J. Daniella dismisses a mother’s failure-to-train and wantonness claims against a climbing gym brought after her daughter fell from an indoor climbing wall racing game because she did not safely clip herself into the wall’s auto-belay system. However, a jury is needed to determine whether the the danger was open and obvious, or whether the gym had adequately warned her of the danger, so the family may pursue a premises liability claim.
Court: USDC Northern District of Alabama , Judge: Danella, Filed On: August 23, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv505, NOS: Other - Forfeiture/Penalty, Categories: negligence, premises Liability
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. Underhill denies the department store's motion for summary judgment, ruling that disputes of fact regarding whether a t-shaped metal hook on the floor caused the shopper to fall must be decided by a jury. Furthermore, surveillance footage that showed the hook was there for at least an hour prior to the accident would allow a reasonable jury to determine the store had notice of the condition and should have picked up the hook.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Underhill, Filed On: August 16, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv1733, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Evidence, negligence, premises Liability
J. Navarro grants Lowes’ motion for summary judgment in this personal injury suit brought by the disabled veteran onto whom several wooden panels fell as he moved them to inspect their condition. An employee who left the veteran to inspect the panels himself told him that he would return after helping another customer. The veteran’s injuries were not caused by the action of any Lowe’s employee, and he fails to establish that a genuine issue of material fact exists.
Court: USDC Nevada, Judge: Navarro, Filed On: August 15, 2023, Case #: 2:20cv773, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Tort, negligence, premises Liability
J. Slaughter finds in favor of Unocal and Chevron on the family's negligence and premises liability claims stemming from the death of their loved one, who fell from an oil platform and drowned in the Pacific Ocean while performing repair work on the platform. The family does not present sufficient evidence that either Unocal or Chevron controls, owns or operates the platform that collapsed and caused the decedent's death, or that they concealed evidence of the purported water damage defect.
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Slaughter, Filed On: August 14, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv1394, NOS: Marine - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: negligence, Wrongful Death, premises Liability
J. Osowik finds the lower court properly granted the home furnishings store's motion for summary judgment in a personal injury case. The injured shopper provided no evidence any of the shelving units she claimed fell and injured her were unlocked or otherwise improperly constructed at the time of the accident. In any case, even if the shelving units had been unlocked, the shopper presents no direct evidence an employee of the store was the one who improperly constructed them. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Osowik, Filed On: August 11, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2798, Categories: Evidence, negligence, premises Liability
J. Edwards finds the trial court improperly dismissed the citizen’s premises negligence lawsuit alleging she slipped and fell while walking toward the restrooms at the medical center. The trial court incorrectly construed the citizen’s complaint as one for medical malpractice and dismissed it on procedural grounds even though there is no evidence she was a patient at the time and her complaint had anything to do with standards of medical care, and it should have treated the case as one of simple negligence. The trial court’s order is overturned and the matter is remanded for further proceedings. Reversed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Edwards, Filed On: August 11, 2023, Case #: 23-0022, Categories: negligence, Medical Malpractice, premises Liability
J. Hunter finds that the trial court improperly ruled in favor of the hospital and the housekeeping company in a negligence action brought by the couple arising from injuries the husband suffered in a slip-and-fall incident. Genuine issues of fact exist as to whether the hospital exercised reasonable care to keep its premises in a safe condition and whether it acted reasonably in merely notifying the company of water on the floor without taking any other action. Reversed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Hunter, Filed On: August 9, 2023, Case #: 55,157-CA, Categories: negligence, premises Liability
J. Hodgens finds that the lower court improperly found against a woman who sued a construction company for negligence after she tripped and fell over a protruding granite block. The lower court determined that the defect was too minor for a negligence claim, but the construction company had plans to correct the defect, which means it was aware of its existence and yet failed to correct it immediately or mark off the area. Vacated.
Court: Massachusetts Court Of Appeals, Judge: Hodgens, Filed On: July 21, 2023, Case #: 22-P-716, Categories: negligence, premises Liability
J. Boyd finds the court of appeals properly ruled against the surviving family of a woman who was killed after being struck by a train. The family sued the railroad company, asserting that a raised hump on the tracks and a poorly maintained yield sign showed its negligence and liability. Because both theories were presented to the jury as one to question the negligence of the company, a harmful error was created. The jury was unable to distinguish which one they believe made the company liable. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Supreme Court, Judge: Boyd, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 21-0769, Categories: Jury, negligence, premises Liability
J. Harris finds the trial court improperly granted summary judgment to Panera in a lawsuit from a consumer who tripped and fell over the weighted base of a sign on the sidewalk in front of one of Panera's restaurants. Important disputes of fact remain regarding whether the sign, which is not a common or everyday object people encounter, was open and obvious and even supposed to be where it was positioned by the entrance to the restaurant. Because the trial court did not properly address Panera's potential negligence, its summary judgment order is overturned and the case is remanded for further proceedings. Reversed.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Harris, Filed On: June 30, 2023, Case #: 22-1496, Categories: negligence, premises Liability
J. Hodges finds that the trial court improperly granted the housing authority's motion to dismiss a premises liability and negligence action brought by an individual after he was shot four times by the housing authority's tenant at apartments owned by the housing authority. The trial court incorrectly found that the housing authority was an instrumentality, department or agency of the state entitled to sovereign immunity. The housing authority was not created by the state and its purpose, function and management are not intertwined with the state. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Hodges, Filed On: June 27, 2023, Case #: A23A0344, Categories: Immunity, negligence, premises Liability
J. McFadden finds that the trial court improperly ruled in favor of the store owner in a premises liability action brought by the customer arising from a trip-and-fall incident. A genuine issue of fact exists as to whether a floor mat on the premises was a hazardous condition. Reversed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: McFadden, Filed On: June 27, 2023, Case #: A23A0240, Categories: negligence, premises Liability
J. Maxwell finds the lower court improperly denied a store’s motion for summary judgment in this negligence claim. A customer allegedly slipped and fell within a minute of entering the store, sustaining injury. The customer did not know what caused the slip, and did not see any hazard before, during, or after the incident. The store employee who took the incident report amended it the following day to show that carpet freshening powder had been the culprit, and that it was cleaned up after the customer reported the fall. The customer presented no evidence that indicated when or how the spill occurred, nor did she present evidence to show the store was negligent, or had knowledge of the spill for any length of time and failed to take action. Reversed.
Court: Mississippi Supreme Court, Judge: Maxwell, Filed On: June 22, 2023, Case #: 2022-IA-01054-SCT, Categories: Evidence, negligence, premises Liability
J. Gesner grants a car dealership its motion to dismiss a negligence and personal injury claims after a customer tripped and fell on uneven rugs, hitting his face and hurting his shoulder and left knee. Because the customer did not file his claim until almost the very end of the statute of limitations in which to do so, his delay unfairly prejudiced the dealership.
Court: USDC Maryland, Judge: Gesner, Filed On: June 8, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv1487, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Tort, negligence, premises Liability
J. Windhorst finds that the trial court properly ruled in favor of the insured and insurer in a negligence action brought by the guest arising from injuries she suffered after falling on allegedly broken cobblestones in a parking lot. The guest failed to show that the condition of the parking lot was unreasonably dangerous. Affirmed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Windhorst, Filed On: June 7, 2023, Case #: 22-CA-362, Categories: negligence, premises Liability
J. McFadden finds that the trial court improperly refused to find in favor of the restaurant on the customer's premises liability, nuisance and negligent training claims arising from chemical burn injuries he suffered when he submerged his hand in a pitcher of liquid nitrogen on a dare. A restaurant employee offered to pay the dinner bill if the customer kept his hand in the pitcher for three seconds. The employee was not acting within the scope of his employment when he dared the customer. The customer also failed to show that the restaurant knew the employee would engage in such conduct. However, the trial court correctly refused to find in favor of the restaurant on derivative claims for punitive damages and attorney fees because three negligence claims remain pending. Reversed in part.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: McFadden, Filed On: June 6, 2023, Case #: A23A0520, Categories: negligence, premises Liability
J. Grasz finds a lower court properly dismissed negligence and strict liability claims brought by a resident who suffers from multiple sclerosis against a manufacturing facility. The resident argued that his condition is the result of exposure to Trichloroethylene from a nearby bearings company. However, he failed to file his claims within a two- year statute of limitations. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Grasz, Filed On: June 5, 2023, Case #: 22-1506, Categories: negligence, premises Liability
J. Schiltz dismisses the minor and her mother’s suit related to burns the minor sustained when a minivan in a Walmart parking lot caught fire and the fire spread to a car where the minor was sleeping. The retailer’s policy of allowing travelers to sleep in its lots does not turn its parking lots into “recreational camping areas” under a Minnesota law regulating such areas, and the minor and her mother have not shown that doing so created a nuisance or that the burns were the result of the retailer’s negligence.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Schiltz, Filed On: May 25, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv1584, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Tort, negligence, premises Liability