Cheryl Kelly v. Four B. Corporation

693 F. App'x 462
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit·Decided July 17, 2017·No. 16-3852·Unpublished

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Cheryl Kelly appeals from an order of the District Court granting summary judgment for the defendants in her removed personal-injury action arising out of a slip- and-fall incident at a grocery store. After de novo review of the record, we conclude that the evidence shows a genuine issue of material fact that precluded summary judgment. See Pippin v. Hill-Rom Co., 615 F.3d 886, 889 (8th Cir. 2010) (standard of review). The evidence, which included video surveillance footage of the • incident, would permit a finder of fact to conclude that one or both defendants were negligent under Missouri law. See id. (recognizing the elements of a Missouri negligence claim as a duty of care, a breach of that duty, and a proximately-caused resulting injury); Smith v. Callaway Bank, 359 S.W.3d 545, 547 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012) (“Whether a defendant’s conduct falls short of the standard of care is generally a question of fact for the jury.”).

Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cheryl Kelly v. Four B. Corporation, 693 F. App'x 462 (8th Cir. 2017).

693 F. App'x 462 (Cheryl Kelly v. Four B. Corporation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pippin v. HILL-ROM CO., INC.
615 F.3d 886 (Eighth Circuit, 2010)
Smith v. Callaway Bank
359 S.W.3d 545 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 2012)