Bankhead v. First Nat. Bank in St. Louis

• Decision Date: 05 March 1940
• Docket Number: No. 25298.,25298.
• Citation: 137 S.W.2d 594
• Parties: BANKHEAD v. FIRST NAT. BANK IN ST. LOUIS.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

137 S.W.2d 594

BANKHEAD v. FIRST NAT. BANK IN ST. LOUIS.

No. 25298.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

March 5, 1940.

Rehearing Denied March 19, 1940.

Writ of Certiorari Granted May 7, 1940.

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; John W. Joynt, Judge.

"Not to be reported in State Reports."

Action by Hazel Bankhead against the First National Bank in St. Louis, Missouri, a corporation, for injuries sustained by plaintiff when she slipped and fell while descending a stairway in defendant's building. From a judgment for plaintiff for $3,000, defendant appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Jones, Hocker, Gladney & Grant and Wm. G. O'Donnell, all of St. Louis, for appellant.

Barak T. Mattingly and Douglas H. Jones, both of St. Louis, for respondent.

BENNICK, Commissioner.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff on November 26, 1935, when she slipped and fell while descending a stairway in the banking house of defendant, First National Bank in St. Louis, Missouri. Tried to a jury, a verdict was returned in favor of plaintiff, and against defendant, for the sum of $3,000. Judgment was entered accordingly; and defendant's appeal to this court has followed in the usual course.

Counting upon the status of an invitee on the premises, plaintiff charged negligence against defendant upon the theory that the stairway, at the time of her fall upon it, was wet and covered with a slimy and slippery substance which rendered the same dangerous and likely to cause persons using it to slip and fall, and that defendant knew or should have known of such dangerous and unsafe condition long enough prior to the time of plaintiff's injury for it to have remedied the condition, but had negligently failed to do so.

The answer was a general denial, coupled with a plea of contributory negligence to the effect that whatever water was upon the steps when plaintiff fell was visible and could have been seen by her if she had looked where she was walking, but that she negligently failed to do so.

Defendant submits but one point for our consideration, which is the question of whether the court committed error in the refusal of its request for a peremptory instruction at the close of the entire case.

Plaintiff's fall occurred on the steps leading down to the first floor from the Olive Street entrance to the bank.

This particular entrance has both outer and inner doors, which are separated by a vestibule some four or five feet in depth. One entering the bank through the Olive Street entrance first passes through one of the outer doors which open out upon the sidewalk, crosses the vestibule, and then passes through one of the inner doors which open out upon a landing at the head of the stairway or series of seven marble steps which lead down to the first floor of the bank. Each step is from twelve to fourteen inches in width, and the stairway itself, which is from fourteen to fifteen feet across, is divided into sections by railings, one of which runs along either wall, with two erected at intervals in the center. The steps are of a cream color and, being made of polished marble, are smooth, with no evidence of wear as yet apparent upon their surface.

Recognizing the fact that in rainy weather the customers and other persons coming into the bank necessarily bring in a certain amount of water which gets upon the stairs and renders them slippery and dangerous if they are not mopped with regularity, the bank has adopted a practice that in rainy weather it assigns one or more porters to every entrance, whose duty it is to mop the entrances and stairs on an average of once every four or five minutes, depending upon the degree of rainfall and the amount of water being carried in. The porters are under the jurisdiction of the superintendent who supervises all matters pertaining to the maintenance of the building, and, in addition, near the bottom of the particular stairway there is a floor-man stationed, a part of whose job it is to see that the steps are taken care of, and who is expected to call downstairs for a porter to be sent up whenever rain begins to fall and water is being carried in.

It was a conceded fact that it had been raining off and on throughout the entire morning of the day on which plaintiff's accident occurred.

Shortly after the noon hour, plaintiff entered the bank through the Olive Street entrance, and started down the east or right-hand section of the stairway, holding on to the rail which ran along the wall. This was her first occasion to use that particular entrance, and while she took casual notice of the flight of steps, she did not observe them closely enough to discover the presence of any water upon them.

She had reached about the third step from the top when her right foot slipped, causing her to fall in a sitting position, with her left leg doubled underneath her. A couple of the bank's employees helped her to her feet, and it was then she discovered that her "clothes were wet" with dirty, slimy water, indicative of the fact that the same had been tracked in from the outside and deposited on the steps.

Defendant's witnesses not only admitted plaintiff's fall, but also admitted that after she had been assisted to her feet, they examined the stairs and found that they were "damp", with "some moisture" upon them from water which had been brought in from the outside by customers of the bank.

While defendant's floorman testified that there had been porters at that entrance all during the morning, who had last mopped the steps a matter of from three to five minutes before the time of p...