2016 Ohio 3225
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- Plaintiff Ella Sanders (age 73) injured her right toe when she pulled open a Golden Corral restaurant door and the door struck her foot, causing a cut and fractured toe.
- Sanders stood close to the door with an unobstructed view, described it as a normal commercial door that did not stick, and testified the door opened "very easily."
- Golden Corral's manager inspected the door, found no defects, and stated the door operated smoothly; no prior incidents or repair orders were shown.
- Sanders sued for negligence; Golden Corral moved for summary judgment relying on Sanders' deposition and the manager's affidavit, asserting the open-and-obvious hazard doctrine and lack of negligence.
- The magistrate granted summary judgment for Golden Corral; the trial court adopted that decision. Sanders appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Golden Corral owed a duty despite the danger being open and obvious | Sanders: door hazard not open and obvious; factual dispute exists | Golden Corral: door operated properly; hazard was open and obvious, so no duty | Court: hazard was open and obvious; no duty owed; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether res ipsa loquitur permits an inference of negligence | Sanders: res ipsa applies to infer defendant negligence | Golden Corral: door was under plaintiff's control when injury occurred, so res ipsa inapplicable | Court: res ipsa inapplicable because defendant lacked exclusive control and injury resulted from plaintiff's action |
| Whether evidence created genuine issue of material fact to defeat summary judgment | Sanders: deposition raises factual disputes (how easily door opened) | Golden Corral: undisputed testimony and manager's inspection show no defect; no contradictory evidence | Court: no competent contradictory evidence; reasonable minds can reach one conclusion adverse to Sanders |
Key Cases Cited
- Armstrong v. Best Buy Co., Inc., 99 Ohio St.3d 79 (Ohio 2003) (elements of negligence and open-and-obvious danger doctrine)
- Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc., 18 Ohio St.3d 203 (Ohio 1985) (landowner duty to business invitees)
- Dresher v. Burt, 75 Ohio St.3d 280 (Ohio 1996) (summary judgment burden-shifting framework)
- Mussivand v. David, 45 Ohio St.3d 314 (Ohio 1989) (existence of duty is a question of law)
- McElhaney v. Marc Glassman, Inc., 174 Ohio App.3d 387 (Ohio Ct. App. 2007) (open-and-obvious hazard need not be seen to be obvious)
- Long v. Noah's Lost Ark, Inc., 158 Ohio App.3d 206 (Ohio Ct. App. 2004) (de novo review of trial court adoption of magistrate decision on summary judgment)
- Smith v. Frederick C. Smith Clinic, 189 Ohio App.3d 473 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010) (res ipsa applied where defendant had exclusive control of automatic door)