Sanderson v. Safeway Stores, Inc.
| Decision Date | 19 December 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 20936,20936 |
| Citation | 161 Colo. 271,421 P.2d 472 |
| Parties | Ina F. SANDERSON and Harvey L. Sanderson, Plaintiffs in Error, v. SAFEWAY STORES, INCORPORATED, a corporation, and Thomas Hawk, Defendants in Error. |
| Court | Colorado Supreme Court |
Mellman, Mellman & Thorn, Denver, for plaintiffs in error.
Henry Blickhahn, Alamosa, for defendants in error.
Ina F. Sanderson brought an action to recover damages occasioned by the alleged negligence of Safeway Stores, Incorporated, and its manager Thomas Hawk, in maintaining the floor of the store. Harvey L. Sanderson is her husband, and he sued to recover for loss of services and consortium, and for medical expenses. At the conclusion of the Sandersons' evidence the trial court granted the defendants' motion for a judgment of dismissal, entered judgment thereon, and dispensed with a motion for new trial.
The Sandersons seek a reversal on the sole ground that they had made out a prima facie case for jury consideration, rendering erroneous the action of the trial court in granting the motion for judgment of dismissal.
The Sandersons entered the Safeway store to purchase groceries, and had selected a number of items which Mr. Sanderson wheeled in a cart toward a check stand when it was recalled that they wished to cash a check. To that end Mrs. Sanderson walked down an aisle of the store toward the cashier's desk when she slipped and fell, sustaining serious injuries to her left hip.
It appears that the Sandersons and other witnesses noted that the floor of the store was cleaned and waxed as usual on the day in question. There was nothing to indicate that the floor was different on that day from its condition on any other day when the plaintiffs or their witnesses were there as customers. According to all, the floor was clean and slick but such condition was not unusual.
It is the law that if there is no evidence upon which a jury may justifiably base a verdict for the plaintiff, the trial court should take the case from it and enter a judgment for the defendant. Plaintiffs' case concluding in such posture should be resolved as a matter of law. Hobson v. Porter, 2 Colo. 28; cf. Neal v. Wilson County Bank, 83 Colo. 118, 263 P. 18.
The Sandersons invoke the so-called California rule which recognizes that proof of a slipping fall itself is sufficient to allow the jury to draw an inference of negligence, citing Nicola v. Pacific Gas & Elec. Co., ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cruz v. Montoya, s. 17670
...P.2d 893 (1980); Mark v. Pacific Gas and Electric Co., 101 Cal.Rptr. 908, 7 Cal.3d 170, 496 P.2d 1276 (1972); Sanderson v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 161 Colo. 271, 421 P.2d 472 (1967). As to Mike's participation, Darla A. Joe threw a punch and knocked him right down. Q. At that time was there a......
-
Alterman Foods, Inc. v. Ligon
...v. New Golden Hotel Co., 80 Nev. 260, 392 P.2d 49 (1964); Safeway Stores v. Dobbs, (Okl.) 424 P.2d 55 (1967); Sanderson v. Safeway Stores, 161 Colo. 271, 421 P.2d 472 (1966); Tatom v. American Mfgrs. Mutual Ins. Co., (La.App.) 320 So.2d 926 (1975); Pollack v. Oak Office Building, 7 Mich.App......
-
Tri-Aspen Const. Co. v. Johnson
...motion, the trial court should take the case from the jury and enter a judgment for the moving party. Sanderson v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 161 Colo. 271, 272, 421 P.2d 472, 473 (1966). In the present case, the trial court denied Tri-Aspen's motion for a directed verdict against the Johnsons o......
-
National Credit Corp. v. Ritchey
...defendant should have known of its presence and failed to use ordinary care to remove it.' The Colorado court in Sanderson v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 161 Colo. 271, 421 P.2d 472, in affirming the trial court's dismissal of an action for damages in a slip and fall case, 'In this state proof th......