Seed v. Smith & Woods Management Corp.

Unidentified witnesses' alleged statements that there were water puddles on the store's floor were hearsay and did not support plaintiff's claim that store had constructive knowledge of a hazard on its floor.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Vickie Ruth Seed and her husband, James S. Seed, Jr., appeal in this premises liability case from the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to Smith & Woods Management Corporation, which managed the wholesale food outlet where Mrs. Seed fell. Mrs. Seed contends the trial court erred in concluding that she failed to establish superior knowledge on the part of Smith & Woods and in excluding portions of her affidavit. Mr. Seed, whose claim for loss of consortium was dependent upon his wife’s claim, contends that because the trial court erred in concluding that Mrs. Seed’s claim was not viable, it was also error to grant summary judgment against him. We find that portions of Mrs. Seed’s affidavit were inadmissible hearsay and that the Seeds failed to establish superior knowledge on the part of Smith & Woods. We therefore affirm the trial court’s judgment.

To prevail, Mrs. Seed hereinafter “Seed” must prove: 1 that the store had actual or constructive knowledge of the hazard, and 2 that she lacked knowledge of the hazard despite exercising ordinary care. Robinson v. Kroger, 268 Ga. 735, 736 1 493 SE2d 403 1997. A defendant may be granted summary judgment in a slip and fall case if it meets its burden of showing that the record demonstrates an absence of evidence to support at least one essential element of the plaintiff’s case. Lau’s Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491, 495 4 405 SE2d 474 1991. In Robinson, the Supreme Court focused on the second prong of the cause of action, the plaintiff’s lack of knowledge. The crux of this case, however, turns not on the injured party’s knowledge of the foreign substance, but on whether the store had constructive knowledge.

Seed v. Smith & Woods Management Corp.

Unidentified witnesses' alleged statements that there were water puddles on the store's floor were hearsay and did not support plaintiff's claim that store had constructive knowledge of a hazard on its floor.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report