Minor v. Super Discount Markets, Inc.
| Decision Date | 04 November 1993 |
| Docket Number | No. A93A2366,A93A2366 |
| Parties | MINOR v. SUPER DISCOUNT MARKETS, INC. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Morris L. Richman, Decatur, for appellant.
Drew, Eckl & Farnham, G. Randall Moody, Jennifer D. Welch, Atlanta, for appellee.
Edna Minor appeals the grant of summary judgment to defendant Super Discount Markets, Inc. d/b/a Cub Foods in this slip and fall case. She contends issues of fact remain as to actual and constructive knowledge of the peril by appellee.
Appellant contends she slipped and fell as she was looking at the poultry display, pushing the shopping cart ahead of her. When she tried to get up, she saw a liquid covering the four- or five-foot aisle between the chicken cooler and another cooler. The substance appeared to be a coating of water as if the floor had been recently mopped. After she fell, she saw an employee about 15 feet away looking at her and holding a mop in his hand. Appellant contends that appellee's employee's presence in the area gives rise to its actual or constructive knowledge of the peril (see Hardin v. Super Discount Market, 205 Ga.App. 646, 423 S.E.2d 18), and that she could not see the wet floor because her shopping cart obstructed her vision immediately in front of her and because she was looking at the chicken with the intention of making a purchase. Held:
The grant of summary judgment to appellee is correct. The evidence shows that, according to her own admission, appellant could have seen the large wet area ahead of her if she had been looking where she was going. The shopping cart obscured her vision of the area immediately in front of and under the cart, but the fact remains that she did not look ahead and see the wet area before she pushed her cart so far into it as to obscure her vision of it. She admits she had shopped in the store previously; she was undoubtedly familiar with shopping carts and knew that normal use of a cart obscures the shopper's view of an area immediately under and in front of the cart. The fact that she was looking at appellee's merchandise does not relieve her of the duty to look where she was going before she pushed the cart so far into the dangerous area that she could not see the danger. To say otherwise would permit customers to barge heedlessly around a store looking at the merchandise, or looking anywhere but in their paths, with no care for their own safety and the safety of others. This would render the proprietor an insurer of his customers' safety, which he is not. Alterman Foods v. Ligon, 246 Ga. 620, 272...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson v. Kroger Co.
...213 Ga.App. 868, 446 S.E.2d 218 (1994); Winn Dixie v. Carroll, 212 Ga.App. 234, 441 S.E.2d 432 (1994); Minor v. Super Discount Markets, 211 Ga.App. 123, 438 S.E.2d 384 (1993); J.H. Harvey Co. v. Johnson, 211 Ga.App. 809, 440 S.E.2d 548 (1994); Foodmax v. Terry, 210 Ga.App. 511, 436 S.E.2d 7......
-
Jones v. Krystal Co.
...knowledge of the peril was superior, for that is the true ground of the proprietor's liability." Minor v. Super Discount Markets, 211 Ga.App. 123, 124, 438 S.E.2d 384 (1993); accord Cook v. Home Depot, supra at 135, 447 S.E.2d 35. While the plaintiff had the duty to come forward with eviden......
-
Service Merchandise, Inc. v. Jackson
...that she could not have discovered and avoided the peril by the exercise of ordinary care for her own safety. Minor v. Super Discount Mkt., 211 Ga.App. 123, 124, 438 S.E.2d 384. In other words, plaintiff was under a duty to look where she was walking. Riggs v. Great Atlantic, etc., Tea Co.,......
-
Department of Human Resources v. Thomas
...and customary task, well known to Thomas, and it did not relieve her of the obligation to watch her path. Minor v. Super Discount Markets, 211 Ga.App. 123, 124, 438 S.E.2d 384 (1993). Nor did the presence of other patrons relieve her of her duty to look where she was going. Colevins, supra ......
-
Torts - Cynthia Trimboli Adams and Charles R. Adams, Iii
...432, 433 (1994) . Accord, Foodmax, Inc. v. Terry, 210 Ga. App. 511, 436 S.E.2d 725 (1993). 69. Minor v. Super Discount Markets, Inc., 211 Ga. App. 123,124, 438 S.E.2d 384, 385 (1993). 70. 209 Ga. App. 1, 432 S.E.2d 230 (1993). 71. Id. at 2, 432 S.E.2d at 232. 72. Id. at 3-4,432 S.E.2d at 23......