Hazell v. Kroger Co.
Citations
- 2017 Ohio 1459
Syllabus
As appellant did not file a memorandum in opposition to appellees' motion or any objection to allegedly non-complying documents in support thereof, the court could consider the same when adjudicating appellee's summary judgment motion. [A] store is not liable for a customer's injuries unless the customer can show: (1) the store, through its officers or employees, placed the substance on the floor (2) at least one of the store's officers or employees had actual knowledge of the presence of the substance and failed to remove it or warn the customer, or (3) the substance had been on the floor long enough that the store officers or employees should have known of its presence and removed it or warned the customer. Appellant did not establish that appellees breached the duty of care owed to her. Judgment in favor of appellee's motions for summary judgment is affirmed.
Judges: Dorrian
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.