Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc., 84-1425
Citation | 18 OBR 267,18 Ohio St.3d 203,480 N.E.2d 474 |
Decision Date | 17 July 1985 |
Docket Number | No. 84-1425,84-1425 |
Parties | , 18 O.B.R. 267 PASCHAL, Appellant, v. RITE AID PHARMACY, INC. et al., Appellees. |
Court | United States State Supreme Court of Ohio |
Twyford & Donahey and Richard S. Donahey, Jr., Columbus, for appellant.
Porter, Wright, Morris & Arthur, Terrance M. Miller, Mason Evans, IV, and Sherry Young, Columbus, for appellees.
The sole issue presented for our determination is whether the trial court erred in holding as a matter of law that appellees did not breach the duty owed appellant as a business invitee. 1
A shopkeeper owes business invitees a duty of ordinary care in maintaining the premises in a reasonably safe condition so that its customers are not unnecessarily and unreasonably exposed to danger. See Campbell v. Hughes Provision Co. (1950), 153 Ohio St. 9, 90 N.E.2d 694 . A shopkeeper is not, however, an insurer of the customer's safety. Further, a shopkeeper is under no duty to protect business invitees from dangers "which are known to such invitee or are so obvious and apparent to such invitee that he may reasonably be expected to discover them and protect himself against them." Sidle v. Humphrey (1968), 13 Ohio St.2d 45, 233 N.E.2d 589 , paragraph one of the syllabus.
Appellant argues that appellees breached their duty of ordinary care by not eliminating, or warning appellant of, the puddle that appellant allegedly slipped in. This court has dealt with this exact issue in S.S. Kresge Co. v. Fader (1927), 116 Ohio St. 718, 723-724, 158 N.E. 174, in which we stated:
See, also, Boles v. Montgomery Ward & Co. (1950), 153 Ohio St. 381, 92 N.E.2d 9 , paragraph two of the syllabus ("Ordinarily, no liability attaches to a store owner or operator for injury to a patron who slips and falls on the store floor which has become wet and slippery by reason of water and slush tracked in from the outside by other patrons."); Rayburn v. J.C. Penney Outlet Store (1982), 3 Ohio App.3d 463, 445 N.E.2d 1167.
Thus, we affirm the judgment of the court of appeals.
Judgment affirmed.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Loren Dean Frost v. Dayton Power and Light Co.
...... the instant appeal. DP&L engaged Enerfab, Inc. ("Enerfab"), an independent contractor, to update. ...See, generally,. Pashcal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc . (1985), 18 Ohio. St.3d 203, 203, ......
-
Schneider v. Kumpf
...United Methodist Church, 2d Dist. Montgomery No. 24082, 2011-Ohio-873, 2011 WL 686413, ¶ 15, citing Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc., 18 Ohio St.3d 203, 480 N.E.2d 474 (1985). However, “liability in tort is an incident to occupation or control.” Cooper, 151 Ohio St. at 317, 85 N.E.2d 545.......
-
Frost v. Dayton Power & Light Co.
...would be tantamount to making appellee an insurer of the premises. See, generally, Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc. (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 203, 203, 18 OBR 267, 267-268, 480 N.E.2d 474, 475 (stating that a premises owner is not an insurer of his Having concluded that appellant's work conta......
-
Uddin v. Embassy Suites Hotel
...Nageotte v. Cafaro Co., 160 Ohio App.3d 702, 2005-Ohio-2098, 828 N.E.2d 683, at ¶ 26, citing Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc. (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 203, 18 OBR 267, 480 N.E.2d 474, and Jackson v. Kings Island (1979), 58 Ohio St.2d 357, 358, 12 O.O.3d 321, 390 N.E.2d 810. However, the owne......