Login

Login

To access this feature, please Log In or Register for your Casebriefs Account.

Add to Library

Add

Search

Login
Register
Register

Thoma v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store

Law Dictionary
CASE BRIEFS

Law Dictionary

Featuring Black's Law Dictionary 2nd Ed.
AA
Font size

Torts Keyed to Dobbs

Citation. Thoma v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store, 649 So. 2d 277 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1st Dist. Jan. 17, 1995)

Brief Fact Summary. In a slip and fall case, the Circuit Court for Leon County (Florida) granted Cracker Barrell Restaurant (Appellee’s) motion for summary judgment, dismissing Deborah Thoma’s (Appellant’s) complaint. Appellant challenged the order.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. To recover for injuries incurred in a slip and fall accident, plaintiff must show that the premises owner either created a dangerous condition or had actual or constructive knowledge of a dangerous condition. Notice of a dangerous condition may be established by circumstantial evidence, such as evidence leading to an inference that a substance has been on the floor for a sufficient length of time such that in the exercise of reasonable care the premises owner should have known the condition.


Facts. Appellant claimed to have suffered a back injury when she fell in a Cracker Barrel Restaurant in September, 1990. After eating breakfast, Thoma was walking away from her table when her left foot slid out from under her. She fell in the middle of a common aisle, near the passage from the kitchen to the restaurant. When Thoma got up, she noticed that area in which she fell was wet, covered in a small puddle of clear liquid. She contends the liquid was what caused her fall. Thoma was in the restaurant about thirty minutes prior to her accident, and during that time, she did not see anyone spill any liquid on the floor where she fell. She alleged that Cracker Barrel was negligent in failing to maintain the floor in that particular area of the restaurant.

Issue. Was summary judgment proper where, in viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, there existed a question as to whether employees exercised due diligence in maintaining the safety of the area in question?

See More Course Videos

Create New Group

Casebriefs is concerned with your security, please complete the following