2021 Ohio 2694
Ohio Ct. App.2021Background
- Plaintiff Kimberly Hefler slipped and fell in a puddle of water in the frozen-food aisle of a Remke grocery store and injured her wrists and a knee.
- It was not raining or snowing that day; Hefler and her fiancé were the only people in the aisle and neither saw the puddle before the fall.
- Store manager Thomas Moore later found a 12–16 inch-wide puddle about one to two feet from a freezer door and observed a trail of water from the freezer to the puddle.
- Moore identified defective freezer door seals (three in that aisle) and testified the puddle likely came from condensation from the faulty seals; the freezer was not actively leaking at his inspection.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for Remke; Hefler appealed arguing Remke had constructive notice of the hazard.
- The court of appeals reversed and remanded, finding a genuine issue of material fact on constructive notice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Remke was entitled to summary judgment because it lacked notice of the puddle (i.e., no duty to warn/remove) | Hefler: evidence (large puddle, trail from freezer, defective seals, no rain) permits inference puddle formed gradually so Remke had constructive notice | Remke: no actual notice; puddle not shown to have existed long enough to impute constructive notice | Court: Reversed — reasonable minds could infer the puddle existed long enough for constructive notice; genuine issue of material fact exists |
Key Cases Cited
- Temple v. Wean United, Inc., 50 Ohio St.2d 317, 364 N.E.2d 267 (Ohio 1977) (summary-judgment standard and rule for construing evidence for nonmoving party)
- Texler v. D.O. Summers Cleaners & Shirt Laundry Co., 81 Ohio St.3d 677, 693 N.E.2d 271 (Ohio 1998) (elements of negligence: duty, breach, proximate causation, injury)
- Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc., 18 Ohio St.3d 203, 480 N.E.2d 474 (Ohio 1985) (business owner owes invitees ordinary care to maintain premises reasonably safe)
- Jackson v. Kings Island, 58 Ohio St.2d 357, 390 N.E.2d 810 (Ohio 1979) (constructive notice may be inferred when hazard existed long enough to have been discovered)
- Presley v. Norwood, 36 Ohio St.2d 29, 303 N.E.2d 81 (Ohio 1973) (plaintiff must show hazard existed for sufficient time to charge owner with constructive notice)
- Ray v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 993 N.E.2d 808 (Ohio Ct. App. 2013) (storeowner liability may be shown by creation, actual notice, or constructive notice of hazard)