Home/Court of Appeals of Arizona/Daugherty v. Montgomery Ward

Daugherty v. Montgomery Ward

422 P.2d 141, 4 Ariz. App. 510, 1967 Ariz. App. LEXIS 324
CourtCourt of Appeals of Arizona
DecidedJanuary 10, 1967
DocketNo. 1 CA-CIV 276
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 422 P.2d 141 (Daugherty v. Montgomery Ward) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arizona primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Daugherty v. Montgomery Ward, 422 P.2d 141, 4 Ariz. App. 510, 1967 Ariz. App. LEXIS 324 (Ark. Ct. App. 1967).

Opinion

STEVENS, Judge.

This appeal relates to the liability of a business to its business invitee for personal injuries sustained by the invitee in an attempt to be seated upon a chair equipped with.casters.

Nan Daugherty, herein referred to as the plaintiff, is a housewife. The defendant, Montgomery Ward, issued a sales contract. Thereafter problems arose in relation to that contract,, and the plaintiff was invited to the defendant’s business office to discuss the matter. On 4 October 1961, she went to the .defendant’s office with an adult son, the youngest of her four children. The office was located in a new building which had first been occupied the previous August. The plaintiff was. directed to the. desk of a woman employee. This employee, who was no longer employed by the defendant at the time of the trial, did not testify. The employee experienced difficulty in locating the proper file. During this time, the plaintiff and her son stood at the desk for a period of 10 to 20 minutes. As the employee turned to leave the room to search for the missing information, “She said, 'Have a chair, it’s going to be a little while’ ”, or some substantially similar phrase. With that comment she pushed the chair in question toward the plaintiff and then left the room.

The plaintiff and her son were then alone in the room. There were no other witnesses to the events which immediately followed. The testimony of the plaintiff is not fully consistent as to these occurrences. There was some variance between her testimony and the testimony of her son. The facts developed rapidly. It is not clear whether [511]*511the chair was moving or stationary at the time the plaintiff attempted to be seated thereon. It is not clear whether she actually momentarily sat on the edge of the chair and then fell or failed to touch the chair as she was in the process of seating herself. It is clear, however, that she sat on the floor and injured herself. The evidence established that the chair came to rest a short distance from her position on the floor.

Among the exhibits introduced in evidence are two photographs which have been reproduced and incorporated in this opinion. The photographs disclose the type of chair, desk and floor in question. The [512]*512floor was smooth, shiny and possibly slippery. It is agreed, however, that the plaintiff did not slip and fall due to a slippery floor surface. All of the furniture including the chairs were new. The chairs rolled easily on the floor surface. Another former employee, who testified for the plaintiff, stated that he was not accustomed to sitting on this type of chair, but instead upon chairs “without wheels, with legs”. He also testified that the defendant had chairs with legs and without wheels which were available.

[511]*511

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

Related

Daugherty v. Montgomery Ward
428 P.2d 419 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
422 P.2d 141, 4 Ariz. App. 510, 1967 Ariz. App. LEXIS 324, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daugherty-v-montgomery-ward-arizctapp-1967.