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
Premises Liability
Slip and Fall

Marilyn Lee v. Patricia Doe, et al.

Published: Oct. 29, 2021 | Result Date: Aug. 14, 2021 | Filing Date: May 14, 2019 |

Case number: 19STCV16715 Summary Judgment –  Defense

Judge

Daniel M. Crowley

Court

Los Angeles County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Daniel Azizi
(Downtown LA Law Group)

Anthony W. Werbin
(Downtown LA Law Group)


Defendant

Frank J. D'Oro
(Wesierski & Zurek LLP)

Gevork Gazaryan
(Wesierski & Zurek LLP)


Facts

Marilyn Lee filed a complaint against Alpha Beta Company (d.b.a. Ralphs Grocery) whom she erroneously sued as Ralphs Grocery Company. Lee slipped and fell in a substance that appeared to be water. She was entering the bathroom located in the Ralphs when this occurred. She was injured by the fall.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that even though defendant asserted that it performed deep cleanings twice daily, on the day of her injury, Ralph's employee indicated that she only spent two minutes on the first deep cleaning and three minutes on the second deep cleaning. Lee further noted that the evidence pointed to the employee not having followed the written policies and procedures provided by Ralphs. Also, it could be inferred that the employee either failed to remedy the situation she created and/or contributed to it by improperly cleaning the floor.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant alleged that it had no actual or constructive notice of the restroom's condition: no employees entered the restroom at that time and no customers informed employees as to any potential issues. Most importantly, it was only 15 minutes from the time its employee cleaned the restroom to plaintiff's fall on the supposed wet condition. Also, the fact that plaintiff's discovery responses were sparse showed that her contentions lacked support.

Result

Defendant's motion for summary judgment was granted.


#137962

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

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