Parsons v. H. L. Green Co.
| Decision Date | 15 June 1943 |
| Docket Number | 46261. |
| Citation | 10 N.W.2d 40,233 Iowa 648 |
| Parties | PARSONS v. H. L. GREEN CO., Inc. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Royal & Royal, of Des Moines, for appellant.
Hallagan Fountain, Steward & Cless, of Des Moines, for appellee.
Plaintiff in her petition alleges that on November 11, 1940, she was injured by falling on the stairway leading from the first floor of defendant's store to the basement, which stairway was slippery and unsafe by reason of water, slush snow and mud allowed to collect thereon by defendant's agents and employees, which condition was known, or should have been known, to defendant. Defendant in its answer made general denial.
About 2:30 in the afternoon on the day of the severe Armistice Day storm which began about 11:30 in the morning, the plaintiff came to the business section in Des Moines from her home on East 18th Street. The wind was blowing, it was snowing, and the day was stormy and cold, though not freezing. The streets were slushy and the snow was wet. This condition continued practically all day. About 4:30 in the afternoon plaintiff went into the entrance of defendant's store, known as the F. & W. Grand Store. In the front of the store is a stairway starting near the door and leading from the floor on the street level to the basement. The plaintiff after entering the front door angled a little to the right, spoke to a friend nearby, and went down the stairs, steadying herself with her hand on the railing on the east side of the stairway. The stairs were of cement with small pieces of tiling in them and were smooth. Plaintiff was carrying a sack of groceries in her left arm and her purse in her right hand. There is testimony that the stairs were slushy and wet and that soft snow had packed thereon, which made the steps wet and muddy. There was also testimony that about half way down the steps plaintiff slipped, fell and was injured.
At the close of plaintiff's evidence defendant moved for a directed verdict on the grounds of lack of evidence of negligence and of proximate cause by any act, omission or breach of duty by defendant; that there was no showing that the condition of the steps on the day in question was the fault or with the knowledge of defendant a sufficient time before the injuries for it to have an opportunity to remove or remedy the condition; of failure to show lack of contributory negligence and that the evidence established the guilt of plaintiff's contributory negligence as a matter of law. The court sustained the motion, dismissed plaintiff's petition and entered judgment. From such ruling and order plaintiff appeals.
I. Plaintiff in her argument alleges, first, that she was an invitee, and second, that defendant was guilty of negligence in permitting conditions to exist which imperiled the safety of those coming upon the premises as such invitees, and as owner, defendant was under the duty of providing for such invitees a place reasonably safe for its intended use. Defendant, while not so admitting, but assuming, that plaintiff was an invitee and that her fall was caused by an accumulation of snow and slush, claims, however, that said defendant did not breach its duty and argues that the jury could not have found from the evidence that plaintiff's injuries were proximately caused by any negligence of the defendant or that said defendant breached or violated any duty owing to the plaintiff.
Plaintiff cites in support of her second proposition, Upp v. Darner 150 Iowa, 403, 130 N.W. 409, 33 L.R.A.,N.S., 743, Ann. Cas. 1912D, 574, which relates to injuries from a barbed wire fence around defendant's property, and holds that the duty to an invitee is to exercise ordinary care and prudence to render the premises reasonably safe for the visit. To the same effect is Noyes v. Des Moines Club, 178 Iowa 815, 160 N.W. 215, involving injuries by falling down an unguarded elevator shaft, and holding that while not an insurer, one whose negligence allows conditions to exist, the existence of which imperils the safety of invitees, is guilty of negligence in not exercising reasonable care to see that the premises are reasonably safe. The same rule is announced in Nelson v. F. W. Woolworth & Co., 211 Iowa 592, 231 N.W. 665, where the action was for injuries from an open stairway and it is there said that the inviter is not an insurer of the invitee's safety, but rather it is incumbent upon the former to exercise ordinary and reasonable care in order that the latter will not be injured. This we may take to be the rule. Other cases cited by plaintiff are Kennedy v. Phillips, 319 Mo. 573, 5 S.W.2d 33, which also relates to injuries sustained in an unguarded elevator shaft, and Hatfield v. Levy Bros., 18 Cal.2d 798, 117 P.2d 841, an action for injuries to a customer falling on a floor in a store which was allegedly excessively waxed. None of the cases cited by plaintiff is similar in its facts to the case at bar but all relate to conditions on the premises which were or must have been known to the persons who extended the implied invitations and who were responsible therefor. They do not involve the...
To continue reading
Request your trial