Mildred C. Kelly v. Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, a Corporation
This text of 284 F.2d 610 (Mildred C. Kelly v. Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company, a Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
While Mrs. Mildred C. Kelly was shopping in one of the appellee’s stores, she stepped into a slippery substance on the floor thought to have been the contents of a jar of baby food. In the complaint filed by her and her husband it was alleged that the appellee “knew, or in the exercise of ordinary case should have known” of the slippery condition of the floor “in sufficient time to have remedied the said slippery, dangerous and unsafe condition before the occurrence hereinafter set forth.” At the conclusion of the evidence, the trial judge directed a verdict for the defendant, whereupon this appeal was taken.
There was no evidence that appellee knew of the presence of foreign matter on the floor, nor did the proof show the condition had existed long enough to justify a holding of constructive notice. Brodsky v. Safeway Stores, 1945, 80 U.S.App.D.C. 301, 152 F.2d 677.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
284 F.2d 610, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 181, 1960 U.S. App. LEXIS 3098, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mildred-c-kelly-v-great-atlantic-and-pacific-tea-company-a-corporation-cadc-1960.