Court of Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, Cuyahoga
Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT Andrew S. Goldwasser Robert A. West
Ciano & Goldwasser, L.L.P.
ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Ian R. Luschin Louis R. Moliterno
Williams, Moliterno & Scully Co., L.P.A.
BEFORE: Celebrezze, J., McCormack, P.J., and Laster Mays, J.
JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION
D. CELEBREZZE, JR., J.
Appellant, Laurie Ann Burke, appeals the grant of summary
judgment in favor of appellee, Giant Eagle, Inc. ("Giant
Eagle"), in her negligence action that related to a slip
and fall inside a Giant Eagle store. Burke claims there are
material issues of fact that cannot be resolved in summary
judgment. After a thorough review of the record and law, this
Factual and Procedural History
On October 28, 2013, Burke entered the Giant Eagle grocery
store located at Legacy Village in Lyndhurst, Ohio. Burke was
there to get a flu shot at the store's pharmacy. As she
proceeded past the customer-service desk and cash-register
area toward the pharmacy, she slipped and fell. After the
fall, she noticed a sticky brown substance on the floor where
she fell. A Giant Eagle employee, Anthony Mann, came over to
Burke after the fall. He left, found some cleaning supplies,
and cleaned up the roughly three-inch sticky brown spot.
Burke asked to speak to a manager, and Sara Lane was summoned
and spoke to Burke. An incident report was completed that
documented the area of the fall, the nature of the liquid on
the ground, and Burke's injuries.
On October 12, 2015, Burke filed a negligence action against
Giant Eagle. Giant Eagle answered and the case proceeded
through discovery. On July 8, 2016, Giant Eagle filed a
motion for leave to file a motion for summary judgment, with
a motion for summary judgment attached. The trial court
granted leave, and Burke filed an opposition brief On
September 16, 2016, the trial court issued a written decision
and opinion granting Giant Eagle's motion. Burke then
filed the instant appeal assigning a single error for review:
Summary judgment was not properly granted because a genuine
issue of material fact exists regarding constructive notice.
Law and Analysis
Burke argues that there are genuine issues of material fact
that make summary judgment inappropriate in this case. She
claims that it is premature to rule that Giant Eagle did not
have constructive notice of the spill, and is thus
responsible for her injuries sustained in the fall.
Civ.R. 56(C) provides in part:
Summary judgment shall be rendered forthwith if the
pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, written
admissions, affidavits, transcripts of evidence, and written
stipulations of fact, if any, timely filed in the action,
show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact
and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter
of law. No evidence or stipulation may be considered except
as stated in this rule. A summary judgment shall not be
rendered unless it appears from the evidence or stipulation,
and only from the evidence or stipulation, that reasonable
minds can come to but one conclusion and that conclusion is
adverse to the party ...