Pennington v. WJL, INC.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming grant of summary judgment when evidence did not show that plaintiff actually tripped over hoses near doorway; circumstantial evidence as to the cause of his fall was speculative and properly disregarded
• affirming grant of summary judgment to defendant when the only causation evidence was the presence of hoses at the accident scene and “speculation after the fact” that plaintiff must have tripped over them
• affirming grant of summary judgment when evidence did 8 not show that plaintiff actually tripped over hoses near doorway; circumstantial evidence as to the cause of his fall was speculative and properly disregarded
• “A mere possibility of causation is not enough and when the matter remains one of pure speculation or conjecture and the probabilities are at best evenly balanced it is appropriate for the court to grant summary judgment to the defendant.”
• “A mere possibility of causation is not enough 6 and when the matter remains one of pure speculation or conjecture and the probabilities are at best evenly balanced it is appropriate for the court to grant summary judgment to the defendant.”
• “A mere possibility of causation [in a trip-and-fall case] is not enough and when the matter remains one of pure speculation or conjecture and the probabilities are at best evenly balanced it is appropriate for the court to grant summary judgment to the defendant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).