This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Personal Injury (Non-Vehicular)
Premises Liability
Trip and Fall

Ann M. Ingram v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., et al.

Published: Nov. 29, 1997 | Result Date: Oct. 2, 1997 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 95A506636 –  $39,927

Judge

Richard K. Park

Court

Sacramento Superior


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Raymond E. Ball


Defendant

Stephen J. Gay


Experts

Defendant

David Chan
(medical)

Facts

On May 25, 1995, plaintiff Ann Ingram, a 62-year-old product demonstrator, was at defendant Wal-Mart Store in Roseville. The plaintiff tried to pull the shopping carts apart, stepped backward and caught her heel on an exposed rebar from a broken concrete bumperguard in a handicap parking space. The plaintiff was an employee of the store but was on vacation at the time of the incident. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant based on a negligence theory of recovery.

Settlement Discussions

The plaintiff made a settlement demand for $80,000. The defendant made an offer of $10,000 at the time of trial.

Specials in Evidence

$3,957.82 $31,938.75

Injuries

The plaintiff suffered a bruised coccyx.

Other Information

The verdict was reached approximately one year and 11 months after the case was filed. An arbitration was held on Sept. 19, 1996, before Anthony G. Arlen of Barkett, Gumpert & Reinea resulting in an award of $32,357.92. Defendant filed a trial de novo. At the end of plaintiff's case, defendants filed a motion for nonsuit based on the fact that plaintiff was an employee at the store where she fell. Defendant claimed that even though she was on vacation at the time of the fall, she had come to the store to check her schedule. Evidence produced by plaintiff was that she did check her schedule, but it was for her own benefit and not required by her employer. The court denied the motion because defendant did not plead the affirmative defense of a workers' compensation injury and it was, therefore, waived.

Deliberation

five hours

Length

three days


#112951

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390