Neura v. Goodwill
2012 Ohio 2351
Ohio Ct. App.2012Background
- Neura, pushing a Goodwill-provided shopping cart down a ramp, encountered a crack at the ramp-into-parking-lot junction.
- The cart struck the crack, causing a sudden stop; Neura braced but both cart and she fell.
- Plaintiff sued Goodwill entities, Paran Management, and Hickory Ridge Limited Partnership for negligence and failure to warn.
- Trial court granted summary judgment, holding the crack was open and obvious and trivial, thus no duty to warn.
- Appellant argues the defect was not open and obvious and not trivial under surrounding circumstances.
- Appellate court reverses, finding genuine issues of material fact regarding noticeability and triviality, and remands.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the defect open and obvious and trivial as a matter of law? | Neura contends the crack was not readily observable; cart blocked view; circumstances make it non-trivial. | Defendants contend the crack was open and obvious and a trivial defect, relieving duty to warn. | Genuine issue exists on observability and triviality; summary judgment improper. |
| Were there attendant circumstances that could have interfered with Neura's ability to observe the defect? | Cart obscured view; she had little prior ramp experience; distraction from the shopping context. | No special circumstances; standard duty to warn expected under open/obvious doctrine. | Question of fact whether circumstances impaired observation; not entitled to summary judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc., 18 Ohio St.3d 203 (Ohio 1985) (premises-liability duty to warn when hazards are not open and obvious)
- Sidle v. Humphrey, 13 Ohio St.2d 45 (Ohio 1968) (open and obvious doctrine limits duty to warn)
- Armstrong v. Best Buy Co., Inc., 99 Ohio St.3d 79 (Ohio 2003) (open-and-obvious defense; warning duty abolished when hazard is obvious)
- Simmers v. Bentley Constr. Co., 64 Ohio St.3d 642 (Ohio 1992) (open and obvious standard clarified)
- Cash v. Cincinnati, 66 Ohio St.2d 319 (Ohio 1981) (defining insubstantial defects by surrounding circumstances)
- Temple v. Wean United, Inc., 50 Ohio St.2d 317 (Ohio 1977) (summary-judgment standards in negligence actions)
- Grossnickle v. Germantown, 3 Ohio St.2d 96 (Ohio 1965) (pedestrian duty; use of senses but not constant downward look)