BRODSKY
v.
SAFEWAY STORES, INC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a storekeeper is not liable for a customer's fall on debris unless there is evidence of negligence in creating or allowing the condition to persist.
A customer sued a store after slipping on vegetable debris, but presented no evidence regarding the quantity, origin, or duration of the debris.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Premises Liability cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant’s complaint charged that appellee allowed vegetable debris to be on the floor of its store and so caused appellant, a customer, to fall and be injured. There was evidence that appellant slipped on some green vegetable. There was no evidence as to the quantity on the floor, how it got there, or how long it had been there. For all that appears, a customer may have dropped a small vegetable just before appellant fell and appellee’s employees may have nad no chance to discover and remove it. Since there was no evidence to the contrary, there was no evidence of negligence on appellee’s part either in creating the alleged condition or in permitting it to continue. Accordingly the trial judge was right in directing a verdict for appellee. A storekeeper is not an insurer of the safey of his premises but is responsible only for negligence.1 If there had been evidence that the condition complained of had continued for a substantial time there might have been a question for the jury.2
Affirmed.
F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Williams, 59 App.D.C. 347, 41 F. 2d 970; Selby v. S. Kann Sons Co., 61 App.D.C. 36, 73 F. 2d 853; Sanitary Grocery Co. v. Snead, 67 App.D.C. 129, 90 F. 2d 374, certiorari denied 302 U.S. 703, 58 S.Ct. 22, 82 L.Ed. 543. There is nothing to the contrary in Washington Loan & Trust Co. v. Hickey, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 59, 137 F. 2d 677.
Washington Market Co. v. Clagett, 19 App.D.C. 12; Hellyer v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 62 App.D.C. 318, 67 F. 2d 584; District of Columbia v. Richards, 75 U.S. App.D.C. 349,128 F. 2d 297.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. Arbaugh's Rest., Inc., 469 F.2d 97 (D.C. Cir. 1972)
-
Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Preston, 269 F.2d 781 (D.C. Cir. 1959)
-
Lottie R. Seganish and Daniel Seganish v. Dist. OF Columbia Safeway Stores, Inc., 406 F.2d 653 (D.C. Cir. 1968)
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wash. Loan & Tr. Co., Inc. v. Hickey, 137 F.2d 677 (D.C. Cir. 1943)
- F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Williams, 41 F.2d 970 (D.C. Cir. 1930)
- Hellyer v. Sears, 67 F.2d 584 (D.C. Cir. 1933)
- Selby v. S. Kann Sons Co., 73 F.2d 853 (D.C. Cir. 1934)
- Dist. of Columbia v. Richards, 128 F.2d 297 (D.C. Cir. 1942)
- Sanitary Grocery Co. v. Snead, 302 U.S. 703 (U.S. 1937)
- N.Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Lydon, 302 U.S. 703 (U.S. 1937)
- Sanitary Grocery Co., Inc. v. Snead (D.D.C. 1937)