Callander Ex Rel. Lingos v. Charleston Doughnut Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that although a missing seat on a stool was an open and obvious condition, the owner should have anticipated the harm
• providing that when a merchant should have anticipated the harm to a customer despite the obvious nature of the defect, the merchant is liable, particularly when the merchant has a “reason to expect that the [customer’s attention may be distracted”
• defining a latent defect as one that a merchant has, or should have, knowledge of, and of which a customer is reasonably unaware
• adopting the standard set forth in the Restatement (Second
• adopting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 343A (1965)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).