 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Ducksworth v. Wal-Mart Stores12/17/2002
as dirty, with shoe prints and cart tracks in it. After Ms. Ducksworth's case-in-chief was presented, Wal-Mart rested without producing any rebuttal evidence, such as testimony by store employees who check the aisles periodically for hazards. Although a jury might have found for Wal-Mart, the question of whether Wal-Mart was negligent or had actual or constructive knowledge that the spill existed should have been presented. The photograph's condition created a question of fact that should have been resolved by the jury. Finding that the facts and inferences created a question of fact from which reasonable minds could differ, we conclude that the lower court erred in granting a directed verdict for Wal-Mart; therefore, we reverse and remand.
. THE JUDGMENT OF THE SCOTT COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT IS REVERSED AND REMANDED. COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE TAXED TO THE APPELLEE.
McMILLIN, C.J., KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., BRIDGES, THOMAS, MYERS, CHANDLER AND BRANTLEY, JJ., CONCUR. IRVING, J., NOT PARTICIPATING.
|