Otis v. First National Bank of Minneapolis

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Otis v. First National Bank of Minneapolis

195 N.W.2d 432, 292 Minn. 497, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1361

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedMarch 3, 1972

Docket42924, 43052

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 195 N.W.2d 432 (Otis v. First National Bank of Minneapolis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Otis v. First National Bank of Minneapolis, 195 N.W.2d 432, 292 Minn. 497, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1361 (Mich. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff slipped and fell on a small puddle of water, 3 to 5 inches in circumference, on defendant bank’s floor near a teller’s window. Except for this puddle and some adjacent small puddles, as well as some “damp footmarks,” plaintiff could “walk just normal” on the “fine, dry floor.” It had been raining hard, and the bank had been open only 20 minutes at the time plaintiff entered. The circumstances strongly suggest that *498 the water was shed from the clothing or umbrellas of one or more persons who preceded plaintiff into the bank.

No evidence was introduced by plaintiff to show that defendant had actual or constructive notice of those puddles. The circumstances of time and condition were not such as to impose upon defendant a duty to have discovered and removed the puddle. The trial court accordingly directed a verdict for defendant, a ruling fully supported by Anderson v. St. Thomas More Newman Center, 287 Minn. 251, 178 N. W. 2d 242 (1970), and Filipczak v. International Brotherhood of Elec. Workers, 292 Minn. 486, 195 N. W. 2d 433 (1972). 1

Affirmed.

1

See, also, Parker v. McCrory Stores Corp. 76 Pa. 122, 101 A. 2d 377 (1954); Parks v. Montgomery Ward & Co. 198 F. 2d 772 (10 Cir. 1952); Deptula v. New Britain Trust Co. 19 Conn. Sup. 434, 116 A. 2d 773 (1955); Tariff v. S. S. Kresge Co. 299 Mass. 129, 12 N. E. 2d 79 (1937).

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

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff slipped and fell on a small puddle of water, 3 to 5 inches in circumference, on defendant bank’s floor near a teller’s window. Except for this puddle and some adjacent small puddles, as well as some “damp footmarks,” plaintiff could “walk just normal” on the “fine, dry floor.” It had been raining hard, and the bank had been open only 20 minutes at the time plaintiff entered. The circumstances strongly suggest that *498 the water was shed from the clothing or umbrellas of one or more persons who preceded plaintiff into the bank.

No evidence was introduced by plaintiff to show that defendant had actual or constructive notice of those puddles. The circumstances of time and condition were not such as to impose upon defendant a duty to have discovered and removed the puddle. The trial court accordingly directed a verdict for defendant, a ruling fully supported by Anderson v. St. Thomas More Newman Center, 287 Minn. 251, 178 N. W. 2d 242 (1970), and Filipczak v. International Brotherhood of Elec. Workers, 292 Minn. 486, 195 N. W. 2d 433 (1972). 1

Affirmed.

1

See, also, Parker v. McCrory Stores Corp. 76 Pa. 122, 101 A. 2d 377 (1954); Parks v. Montgomery Ward & Co. 198 F. 2d 772 (10 Cir. 1952); Deptula v. New Britain Trust Co. 19 Conn. Sup. 434, 116 A. 2d 773 (1955); Tariff v. S. S. Kresge Co. 299 Mass. 129, 12 N. E. 2d 79 (1937).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

195 N.W.2d 432, 292 Minn. 497, 1972 Minn. LEXIS 1361, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/otis-v-first-national-bank-of-minneapolis-minn-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack