James v. Sirmans

How courts have described this case

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

• presuming invitee to have knowledge of hazard only where the evidence showed invitee had successfully negotiated the alleged dangerous condition on previous occasions
• affirming summary judgment because the plaintiff acknowledged that a sidewalk crack that caused her to fall “was pretty obvious to anybody walking in the door”
• reiterating that “small cracks, holes and uneven spots” in pavement are common and, where nothing obstructs or interferes with a person’s ability to see such a defect, “the owner or occupier of the premises is justified in assuming that a visitor will see it and realize the risk involved”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).