Gerry Hodge v. Walgreen Co., 37 F.4th 461

Plaintiff Gerry Allen Hodge (an adult with Down syndrome) tripped and fell at the junction between a Walgreens parking lot and a brick sidewalk after shopping; he suffered a serious head injury.
Hodge initially told his sister he tripped on the "lip" where pavement met sidewalk, but at deposition could not recall the cause.
Witness Kami Means saw him fall at the parking-lot/sidewalk edge but could not identify what he tripped on and testified the surfaces were "pretty much the same level."
Hodge’s nephew took photographs and submitted an affidavit; photos and witness testimony showed no holes, crumbling, debris, or obvious deterioration where the fall occurred.
Walgreens moved for summary judgment; the district court held Hodge failed to raise a genuine dispute that the lip was a dangerous condition under Missouri premises-liability law and granted judgment for Walgreens. The Eighth Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the "lip" between parking lot and sidewalk was a dangerous condition making Walgreens liable	Hodge: he told his sister he tripped on the lip; photos and an affidavit show uneven meeting of surfaces; a witness saw the fall at the edge	Walgreens: no evidence of any meaningful height difference or unsafe condition; witnesses/photos show surfaces were not deteriorated or hazardous	The court held Hodge failed to produce direct or circumstantial evidence that the lip was a dangerous condition; summary judgment for Walgreens affirmed
Whether circumstantial evidence here could create a triable issue on dangerousness without expert testimony	Hodge: circumstantial evidence (statement, witness location, photos) suffices; expert not required	Walgreens: movant properly pointed out absence of evidence; plaintiff must then produce affirmative specific evidence to create dispute	The court held the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to permit a reasonable inference that a dangerous condition caused the fall

Christian v. St. Francis Medical Center, 536 S.W.3d 356 (Mo. Ct. App. 2017) (sets elements for invitee premises-liability claim)
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (movant may discharge summary-judgment burden by showing absence of evidence for an essential element)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (standard for summary judgment and burden of proof considerations)
Shanner v. United States, 998 F.3d 822 (8th Cir. 2021) (distinguished; contained stronger testimony/expert evidence on sidewalk unevenness)
Rycraw v. White Castle Sys., 28 S.W.3d 495 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000) (circumstantial evidence can support inference of dangerous condition)
Morrison v. St. Luke’s Health Corp., 929 S.W.2d 898 (Mo. Ct. App. 1996) (instrumentality is dangerous if inherently dangerous, defective, or placed so as to create danger)
Heacox v. Robbins Educ. Tours, Inc., 829 S.W.2d 600 (Mo. Ct. App. 1992) (court rejected vague testimony about steepness as insufficient to show unreasonable risk)
Tiger v. Quality Transportation, Inc., 375 S.W.3d 925 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012) (photos and testimony of cracked/uneven surface supported inference of dangerous condition)
Smith v. The Callaway Bank, 359 S.W.3d 545 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012) (different facts; involved a displaced lava rock and open-and-obvious issue)