Posts Tagged ‘slip and fall’

Great moments in slip and fall claims

The First Circuit has upheld a trial court’s dismissal on summary judgment of an outside worker’s suit against an auto dealership over a slip-fall injury he incurred on the floor in its garage and service area. The court noted that the reason for his presence at the dealership was that his company had been hired to clean it, and that he had said in his deposition that “typically there would be oil and grease everywhere” on that part of the floor after a day’s operations. Besides deeming the hazard to be open and obvious, the trial court had “noted Massachusetts precedent holding that a property owner does not owe a duty of care to a plaintiff where ‘the danger presented to the plaintiff was one that he had been hired to cure.'” [LaPointe v. Silko Motor Sales, First Circuit]

Liability roundup

Liability roundup

“Robot Patrols Grocery Store to Prevent Slip-and-Falls”

Marty, a robot, patrols the aisles in a Giant food store in Pennsylvania, part of a test program of a technology developed by a Kentucky company. “The robot is equipped with scanners so he doesn’t bump into displays or shoppers. He also has several internal cameras that reach about three fourths of the way down aisles,” a manager for Ahold USA said. “The robot’s main job right now is to scan for trip or slip hazards on the floor,” which can reduce liability payouts not only by aiding rapid cleanup of spills, but also by documenting that the site of a spill had not been the scene of a slip hazard for very long, reducing the chance of a finding of liability. [Sue Gleiter, PennLive via TortsProf/Robinette]

Oz court: supermarkets need not shadow shoppers against slip hazards

A court in Australia has ordered costs against a claimant who had sued a grocery store after a slip-fall, after finding that “the grape could not have been on the floor longer than 10 minutes… and it was not realistic to expect every piece of vegetable matter which fell to the floor be picked up instantly.” [Harriet Alexander, Melbourne Age via Tortylicious on Facebook]:

“Coles is not bound to ensure the absolute safety of entrants to its stores,” he said.

“It must take reasonable care.

“Coles could not have been expected to ensure safety by, for example, having several staff in every aisle doing nothing but watching for dropped vegetable matter, or by allocating a staff member to ‘shadow’ every customer as they walked around the store.”

Al Sharpton’s daughter, suing NYC from high places

“Dominique Sharpton posted pictures to Instagram showing she completed a difficult mountain climb in Bali, Indonesia — even though her suit says that ‘she still suffers’ debilitating pain after twisting her ankle in a street crack in Soho last year.” [New York Post and more (“Al Sharpton’s daughter sues city for $5M after spraining ankle”)]

Liability roundup

  • “Judge dismisses Brady Center’s lawsuit. Ammo retailers not to blame for Aurora theater killer” [Denver Post via @davekopel]
  • “Ever been in a crowded subway car when a gunfight broke out? I have.” And it relates to slip-fall cases [Eric Turkewitz]
  • No more of Prosser’s tricks: Scalia warns modern Restatements “of questionable value, must be used with caution” [Orin Kerr]
  • Impact of revelations in Garlock document trove continues to ripple: “Insurer Claims Asbestos Fraud Tainted Pittsburgh Corning Bankruptcy” [Daniel Fisher, Forbes, earlier]
  • Trial lawyer allies want to make California’s insurer-shackling Prop 103 even (if possible) worse [Ian Adams, Insurance Journal, see also]
  • “The settlement shakedown”: Scott Shackford on the Moonlight Fire case in California [Reason, earlier]
  • This must be what they call a hellhole jurisdiction [comic book cover via Jim Dedman, Abnormal Use]