Skip to main content

Fredrickson v. Bertolino's Tacoma, Inc.

Citations

  • 131 Wash. App. 183
  • 127 P.3d 5

How courts have described this case

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

  • affirming a summary judgment granted to a defendant, the court reasoned that the evidence was insufficient to show that the defendant's coffee shop chair, which allegedly broke beneath the plaintiff, posed an unreasonable risk of harm to customers
  • declining to extend Washington's mode of operation exception to a collapsed chair incident where plaintiff did not establish, \that the danger of breaking chairs was continuous or foreseeably inherent in the nature of\ defendant's business
  • jury must decide whether a \defective condition existed long enough so that it would have been discovered by an owner exercising reasonable care\
  • jury must decide whether a “defective condition existed long enough so that it would have been discovered by an owner exercising reasonable care”
  • summary judgment appropriate where plaintiff did not know what was wrong with chair or caused it to collapse
  • “Ordinarily, it is a question of fact for the jury whether, under all of the circumstances, a defective condition existed long enough so that it would have been discovered by an owner exercising reasonable care.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Armstrong

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Fredrickson v. Bertolino's Tacoma, Inc.

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.