Brown v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

Issues of material fact remained as to whether the defendant had constructive knowledge that shrink wrap was left in its store's aisle and whether the decedent lacked knowledge of the hazard despite exercising ordinary care.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Mary Brown, the administrator of Bernice Hines’s estate, appeals from a grant of summary judgment in the estate’s negligence action against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. for failing to remove shrink wrap left in the aisle of a store. Hines fell over the shrink wrap, injuring her left leg, which was partially amputated some months later. We reverse because issues of material fact remain that must be resolved by a jury. “Summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Citations and punctuation omitted. Walker v. Gwinnett Hosp. System , 263 Ga. App. 554, 555 588 SE2d 441 2003. A trial court’s grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo on appeal, construing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant. Id. Once the party moving for summary judgment has made a prima facie showing that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, the nonmovant must then come forward with rebuttal evidence sufficient to show the existence of a genuine issue of material fact. Weldon v. Del Taco Corp. , 194 Ga. App. 174, 174-175 390 SE2d 87 1990.

So viewed, the record shows that on the day Hines fell, Wal-Mart employees placed a shrink-wrapped pallet between two merchandise displays in the middle of a large store aisle known to employees as “action alley.” The employees then cut away the clear shrink wrap from the pallet and began to restock nearby shelves. As they did so, some of the shrink wrap from the pallet fell into the side aisles leading around the merchandise displays. Hines, who was carrying “a few small items in her hand,” stopped to get a bag of potato chips. As she did so, her foot became entangled in the clear shrink wrap, “which was difficult to see from a standing position,” and she fell. As Hines’s friends and Wal-Mart employees helped her into a wheelchair, another employee picked up the plastic and ran with it out of the back door of the store.

Brown v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

Issues of material fact remained as to whether the defendant had constructive knowledge that shrink wrap was left in its store's aisle and whether the decedent lacked knowledge of the hazard despite exercising ordinary care.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report