Mills v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Mills v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

201 A.2d 20, 1964 D.C. App. LEXIS 300

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 4, 1964

DocketNo. 3435

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 201 A.2d 20 (Mills v. Safeway Stores, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mills v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 201 A.2d 20, 1964 D.C. App. LEXIS 300 (D.C. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, while a customer in one of ap-pellee’s stores, slipped on a piece of string bean in one of the aisles, fell and was injured. At the close of her case the trial court directed a verdict against her and she has appealed.

Appellant could, offer no evidence either as to the length of time the bean had been on the floor or as to the cause of its being there. She seeks to overcome the effect of our decision in Orum v. Safeway Stores, D.C.Mun.App., 138 A.2d 665 (1958), a case very similar in fact, by her testimony that immediately prior to her fall two of the store’s employees walked over the area where she fell. She argues that the jury could have found that these employees either saw, or should have seen, the bean and should have either removed it or warned her of its presence.

On the evidence in this case a jury finding that the employees did see the piece of bean would have been based on conjecture and speculation; and a finding that the employees should have seen the bean would have placed a greater degree of care on the store than the law requires.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant, while a customer in one of ap-pellee’s stores, slipped on a piece of string bean in one of the aisles, fell and was injured. At the close of her case the trial court directed a verdict against her and she has appealed.

Appellant could, offer no evidence either as to the length of time the bean had been on the floor or as to the cause of its being there. She seeks to overcome the effect of our decision in Orum v. Safeway Stores, D.C.Mun.App., 138 A.2d 665 (1958), a case very similar in fact, by her testimony that immediately prior to her fall two of the store’s employees walked over the area where she fell. She argues that the jury could have found that these employees either saw, or should have seen, the bean and should have either removed it or warned her of its presence.

On the evidence in this case a jury finding that the employees did see the piece of bean would have been based on conjecture and speculation; and a finding that the employees should have seen the bean would have placed a greater degree of care on the store than the law requires.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 A.2d 20, 1964 D.C. App. LEXIS 300, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mills-v-safeway-stores-inc-dc-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack