Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates, No. 4322
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas |
| Citation | 443 S.W.2d 75 |
| Decision Date | 20 June 1969 |
| Parties | Page 75 443 S.W.2d 75 Henry SEIDENECK et ux., Appellants, v. CAL BAYREUTHER ASSOCIATES, Appellees. Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Eastland |
| Docket Number | No. 4322 |
Page 75
v.
CAL BAYREUTHER ASSOCIATES, Appellees.
Eastland.
Rehearing Denied July 11, 1969.
Payne, Pace & Benners, Fred H. Benners, Dallas, for appellants.
Thompson, Knight, Simmons & Bullion, Timothy E. Kelley, Dallas, for appellees.
WALTER, Justice.
Henry Seideneck and his wife Margaret filed suit against Richard C. Seymour and Gloria Bayreuther, doing business as Cal Bayreuther Associates for damages for personal injuries sustained by Mrs. Seideneck when she tripped on a rug and broke her wrist while shopping in defendants' showroom. When the plaintiffs rested, the court granted defendants' motion for an instructed verdict and judgment was rendered against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs have appealed.
Mrs. Seideneck went to appellees' showroom to purchase merchandise for her gift shop. She approached a display table to check the price tag on a miniature Christmas tree. After checking the price, she backed away from the table and her heel was caught causing her to fall backwards. She then looked to see what had caused
Page 76
her to fall and noticed a small throw rug made with loops and fringe extending out from under the edge of the table. The throw rug was about thirty six inches in diameter. The defendant Seymour described the rug as a loosely woven fringe and tassel type with openings or loops of one inch in diameter. He further testified that the rug extended beyond the edge of the display table six to eight inches or possibly a foot. Mrs. Seideneck was asked 'How far beyond the edge of the table would you estimate that the rug extended?' She answered 'Oh, took two or three steps, I am not very good at judging.'Appellants contend the court erred in rendering judgment for the defendants because the evidence raised issues of fact as to the defendants' failure to exercise reasonable care in keeping defendants' premises in a reasonably safe condition so that Mrs. Seideneck would not be injured.
Appellants contend there is no evidence that the looped throw rug was 'open and obvious to anyone who entered the shop.' Mrs. Seideneck testified, in effect, that the rug extended two or three steps beyond the edge of the table and that she had walked over the looped throw rug two or three steps to look at the small Christmas tree on the table. As she stepped backwards on the rug that she had been standing on while she was observing the tree, she fell. There was no hidden or latent danger in using the rug. It was just as obvious to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates, No. B--1703
...defendants' motion for instructed verdict and rendered judgment that the plaintiffs take nothing. The court of civil appeals affirmed. 443 S.W.2d 75. We Mrs. Seideneck pleaded that she was tripped by a hole or loop in the defendants' rug while she was a business invitee in the Cal Bayreuthe......
-
Dodd v. Trans-Texas Theatres, Inc., TRANS-TEXAS
...1963); Marshall v. San Jacinto Bldg., 67 S.W.2d 372 (Beaumont Tex.Civ.App., 1933, writ ref.); Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates, 443 S.W.2d 75 (Eastland Tex.Civ.App., 1969, affirmed at 451 S.W.2d 752; Tex.); A. C. Burton Co. v. Stasny, 223 S.W.2d 310 (Galveston Tex.Civ.App., 1949, writ......
-
Young v. Braum's, Inc., No. 5:19-cv-161-RWS-CMC
...open and obvious condition as one that "any fool can plainly see." Id.; see also Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates,Page 8 443 S.W.2d 75, 76 (Tex. App.—Eastland 1969), aff'd, 451 S.W.2d 752 (Tex. 1970). Additionally, because the inquiry is objective, the invitee's personal kno......
-
Mosley v. Kroger Tex. L.P., No. 3:19-cv-02943-M
...described an open and obvious condition as one that "any fool can plainly see." Id.; Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates, 443 S.W.2d 75, 76 (Tex. App.—Eastland 1969), aff'd, 451 S.W.2d 752 (Tex. 1970). Additionally, because the inquiry is objective, the invitee's personal knowl......
-
Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates, No. B--1703
...defendants' motion for instructed verdict and rendered judgment that the plaintiffs take nothing. The court of civil appeals affirmed. 443 S.W.2d 75. We Mrs. Seideneck pleaded that she was tripped by a hole or loop in the defendants' rug while she was a business invitee in the Cal Bayreuthe......
-
Dodd v. Trans-Texas Theatres, Inc., TRANS-TEXAS
...1963); Marshall v. San Jacinto Bldg., 67 S.W.2d 372 (Beaumont Tex.Civ.App., 1933, writ ref.); Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates, 443 S.W.2d 75 (Eastland Tex.Civ.App., 1969, affirmed at 451 S.W.2d 752; Tex.); A. C. Burton Co. v. Stasny, 223 S.W.2d 310 (Galveston Tex.Civ.App., 1949, writ......
-
Young v. Braum's, Inc., No. 5:19-cv-161-RWS-CMC
...open and obvious condition as one that "any fool can plainly see." Id.; see also Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates,Page 8 443 S.W.2d 75, 76 (Tex. App.—Eastland 1969), aff'd, 451 S.W.2d 752 (Tex. 1970). Additionally, because the inquiry is objective, the invitee's personal kno......
-
Mosley v. Kroger Tex. L.P., No. 3:19-cv-02943-M
...described an open and obvious condition as one that "any fool can plainly see." Id.; Seideneck v. Cal Bayreuther Associates, 443 S.W.2d 75, 76 (Tex. App.—Eastland 1969), aff'd, 451 S.W.2d 752 (Tex. 1970). Additionally, because the inquiry is objective, the invitee's personal knowl......