JOAN RESS, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
X-TRA SUPER FOOD CENTERS, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLEE
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.
Joan Ress slipped and fell on a substance (allegedly sauerkraut) in X-tra Super Food Centers' store. The trial court granted summary judgment for X-tra, but the appellate court reversed, finding a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether X-tra had constructive notice of the dangerous condition.
The defendant did not meet its burden on summary judgment of conclusively demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact regarding constructive notice. A genuine issue of material fact exists based on the substance's presence for at least five minutes, its black appearance suggesting it had been stepped on previously, and the store manager's admission that such a condition could create a dangerous situation.
[1] A store owner may have constructive notice of a dangerous condition on the floor if the condition has existed for a sufficient length of time and is of such a nature that…
[2] The appearance of a substance on the floor, such as being "gunky, dirty and wet and black," can be evidence that it had been present for a significant duration.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“On the record presented to the trial court we conclude that X-tra did not successfully carry its burden of conclusively demonstrating that there was no existing genuine issue of material fact.”
Establishes that the defendant failed to meet the summary judgment burden of proving absence of material fact disputes.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJoan Ress was walking through X-tra's supermarket aisle and stepped on a substance that appeared to be sauerkraut, falling and injuring herself. She h…
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 Slip And Fall cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, JAMES C., Senior Judge.
Appellants, Joan and William Ress, appeal from a summary judgment entered against them in a slip and fall case which they filed against appellee, X-tra Super Food Centers, Inc. While walking through an aisle of X-tra’s super market, Joan Ress stepped on a substance on the floor which appeared to be sauerkraut and fell, injuring herself. Joan had been in that particular aisle for at least five minutes, during which time no one passed her. Prior to the time that she slipped and fell she had been looking up at a “huge display” of paper towels which reached “up to the rafters.” Joan testified in a deposition that the substance she fell on looked like sauerkraut and it was “gunky, dirty and wet and black.” The deposition evidence further showed that the store sold hot dogs to customers for consumption on the premises. There were condiments and customers could request sauerkraut. Customers were free to either sit on the benches near the area where the hot dogs were sold or walk around the store while consuming hot dogs.
Joan and William sued for damages based upon X-tra’s negligence in allowing the aforesaid condition to exist. In due course X-tra filed a motion for summary judgment, the thrust of which contended that there was no genuine issue of material fact existing because there was no proof that X-tra actually or constructively knew of the presence on the floor of the substance causing Joan’s fall. It is conceded there was no actual notice; the issue presented is whether X-tra had constructive notice of the condition.
On the record presented to the trial court we conclude that X-tra did not successfully carry its burden of conclusively demonstrating that there was no existing genuine issue of material fact. Moore v. Morris, 475 So. 2d 666 (Fla.1985); Cufferi v. Royal Palm Development Co., Inc., 516 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Suggs v. Allen, 563 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).
The pleadings, depositions and other matters contained in the record show that the substance which caused Joan to slip and fall, a substance she perceived to be sauerkraut, had been there for at least five minutes. Furthermore, the substance was black which could lead one to conclude that it had been stepped on before and thus had been there for longer than the five minutes Joan could account for.1 We note also that the store manager admitted that the existence of the substance on the floor could create a dangerous condition. It is therefore the court’s conclusion that all the circumstances considered, a genuine issue of material fact exists.
On appeal Joan and William additionally contend that the manner in which the paper towel display was constructed caused Joan’s attention to be diverted from the condition of the floor thus excusing her failure to see it as she proceeded down the aisle. X-tra responds by noting that this contention was neither pled nor argued below. Nevertheless, if that contention would state a cause of action for negligence we believe it can be pled by the plaintiffs by way of an amendment to the complaint on remand.
In view of the foregoing we reverse the judgment appealed from and remand the cause for further proceedings.
HERSEY and DELL, JJ., concur. . The condition of the substance alleged to have caused an accident such as presented here has been considered in other cases as bearing on the critical time span during which the dangerous condition had existed. Newalk v. Florida Supermarkets, Inc., 610 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (oil spots on the floor appeared old.); Winn-Dixie Stores v. Williams, 264 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972) (sticky, dusty and dirty substance); Washington v. Pic-N-Pay Supermarket, Inc., 453 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (collard greens looked old and nasty); Marlowe v. Food Fair Stores of Florida, Inc., 284 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973) (black looking piece of rotten banana).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Owens v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc., 802 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2001)…with lumps in it); Woods v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., 621 So. 2d 710, 711 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (unidentified substance described as “very dirty,” “trampled,” “containing skid marks, scuff marks,” and “chewed up”); Ress v. X-tra Super Food Ctrs., Inc., 616 So. 2d 110, 110-11 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (substance that appeared to be sauerkraut was “gunky, dirty and wet and black”); Hodges v. Walsh, 553 So. 2d 221, 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (sticky substance in bowling alley had dried); Washington v. Pic-N-Pay Supermarket,…
-
Lorraine M. Greenleaf and her Husband v. Amerada Hess Corp., 626 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…arry its burden of conclusively demonstrating that there was no existing genuine issue of material fact as to the critical question of constructive or actual notice. Moore v. Morris, 475 So. 2d 666 (Fla.1985); Ress v. X-Tra Super Food Centers, Inc., 616 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). While there was a dispute as to how long the dangerous condition existed, the fact that an employee may be able to see the location of a puddle from his or her workplace has been held to be some circumstantial evidence of constr…
-
Grier v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 660 So. 2d 273 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…s significant that we have been cited to no decision which holds, as does the majority, that a dangerous condition in existence for anything like this two-year period was undis-coverable as a matter of law. See Ress v. Xtra Super Food Centers, Inc., 616 So. 2d 110 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (presence of sauerkraut on supermarket floor for five minutes or more raises issue of constructive notice); Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Benton, 576 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (milk on aisle floor between fifteen and thirty min…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Moore v. Morris, 475 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 1985)
- Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Williams, 264 So. 2d 862 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)
- Marlowe v. Food Fair Stores OF Fla., Inc., 284 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- Cufferi v. Royal Palm Dev. Co., Inc., 516 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Newalk v. Fla. Supermarkets, Inc., 610 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Suggs v. Elliott Allen and Trisha Allen, 563 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Ruthie Mae Washington v. Pic-N-Pay Supermarket, Inc., 453 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)