From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brodsky v. Safeway Stores

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Dec 17, 1945
152 F.2d 677 (D.C. Cir. 1945)

Opinion

No. 8943.

Argued November 14, 1945.

Decided December 17, 1945.

Appeal from the Municipal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Action by Sarah Brodsky against Safeway Stores, Inc., to recover for injuries sustained by plaintiff in a fall in one of defendant's stores. From a judgment for defendant, entered upon a directed verdict, 41 A.2d 514, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Mr. Mark Friedlander, of Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Jack Politz, of Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellant.

Mr. Richard W. Galiher, of Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Henry I. Quinn, of Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellee.

Before EDGERTON, WILBUR K. MILLER, and PRETTYMAN, Associate Justices.


Appellant's complaint charged that appellee allowed vegetable debris to be on the floor of its store and so caused appellant, a customer, to fall and be injured. There was evidence that appellant slipped on some green vegetable. There was no evidence as to the quantity on the floor, how it got there, or how long it had been there. For all that appears, a customer may have dropped a small vegetable just before appellant fell and appellee's employees may have had no chance to discover and remove it. Since there was no evidence to the contrary, there was no evidence of negligence on appellee's part either in creating the alleged condition or in permitting it to continue. Accordingly the trial judge was right in directing a verdict for appellee. A storekeeper is not an insurer of the safey of his premises but is responsible only for negligence. If there had been evidence that the condition complained of had continued for a substantial time there might have been a question for the jury.

F.W. Woolworth Co. v. Williams, 59 App.D.C. 347, 41 F.2d 970; Selby v. S. Kann Sons Co., 64 App.D.C. 36, 73 F.2d 853; Sanitary Grocery Co. v. Snead, 67 App.D.C. 129, 90 F.2d 374, certiorari denied 302 U.S. 703, 58 S.Ct. 22, 82 L.Ed. 543. There is nothing to the contrary in Washington Loan Trust Co. v. Hickey, 78 U.S.App.D.C. 59, 137 F.2d 677.

Washington Market Co. v. Clagett, 19 App.D.C. 12; Hellyer v. Sears, Roebuck Co., 62 App.D.C. 318, 67 F.2d 584; District of Columbia v. Richards, 75 U.S. App.D.C. 349, 128 F.2d 297.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Brodsky v. Safeway Stores

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Dec 17, 1945
152 F.2d 677 (D.C. Cir. 1945)
Case details for

Brodsky v. Safeway Stores

Case Details

Full title:BRODSKY v. SAFEWAY STORES, Inc

Court:United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

Date published: Dec 17, 1945

Citations

152 F.2d 677 (D.C. Cir. 1945)
80 U.S. App. D.C. 301

Citing Cases

Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Preston

But there was no evidence whatever that any preceding customer had purchased vegetables, and clearly the…

Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Morgan

The facts which imply notice in this case are, in appellee's view, the quantity of grapes on the floor and…