Confidential

Facts

On June 25, 2007, plaintiff, 57, was walking into the entranceway of defendant's premises when her heel became stuck in the rubber open link grid mat in the entrance of the store. Surveillance video produced by the defendant showed that plaintiff's heel stuck in the mat at which time the plaintiff lost her balance and fell to the ground. The plaintiff attempted to brace herself with her right arm and, in doing so, fractured her right radial head bone in her forearm.

The plaintiff claimed negligence and premises liability causes of action against the defendant.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that the open grid mat utilized by defendant at the entrance of the store created a dangerous trap condition and an unreasonable risk of injury. The rubber open grid mat had holes in it, which is utilized for drainage purposes.

Plaintiff's expert testified that the use of the mat in the entranceway was a dangerous condition as it was foreseeable that customers traversing the mat could wear high heels. Manufacturers of open grid mats similar to the subject mat warn consumers to avoid using the grid mats in areas were ladies wear high heels. The National Safety Council in 1995 indicated that the open grid style mats caused risk for high heels.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that plaintiff was walking briskly and not paying attention. The defendant contended that plaintiff presented no evidence of the measurement of the holes in the mat or plaintiff's shoe heel. Defendant also contended that plaintiff presented no evidence of foreseeability that someone with such narrow high heels would enter defendant's premises. The defendant denied liability for the incident.

Specials in Evidence

$40,206; $19,500; $6,200. $22,000;

Damages

Plaintiff claimed $475,000 in damages for past and future pain and suffering.

Injuries

The plaintiff suffered a fracture of the right radial head in her right elbow. She underwent a closed reduction and pin fixation. The plaintiff now requires a radial head replacement surgery. The defense doctor was in agreement that the plaintiff required another surgery to fix her radial head fracture, but recommended proceeding with a radial head excision surgery without placement of an implant.

Result

Plaintiff's verdict for $263,176. The jurors found that plaintiff was negligent, but that the plaintiff's negligence was not a substantial factor in causing her harm.

Other Information

The plaintiff filed a motion for cost of proof sanctions. The parties settled for an undisclosed amount. FILING DATE: July 30, 2008.

Deliberation

four hours

Poll

11-1 (defendant's negligence)

Length

four days