Volusia County Court Grants Summary Judgment for Retail Store Defendant in Slip-and-Fall Case

CSK Defense
Orlando Partner Stephanie McCoy

Case Summary
The premises liability lawsuit arose from an alleged slip-and-fall incident at the Defendant's retail store. The Plaintiffs alleged that one Plaintiff sustained injuries to his shoulder, back, hip, and knees after slipping on a substance in a store aisle.

According to testimony, the Plaintiff did not see anything on the floor before the fall but afterward noticed what he described as green, slimy debris. Neither the Plaintiff nor his spouse could identify where the substance came from or how long it had been on the floor.

Defense Strategy
Ms. McCoy pursued summary judgment, arguing that the Plaintiffs could not establish that the Defendant knew or should have known about the alleged dangerous condition, as required under Florida's slip-and-fall law.

The defense relied on store surveillance footage showing more than 30 customers passing through the aisle in the eight minutes preceding the incident without difficulty. Ms. McCoy also cited Florida appellate decisions establishing that the presence of a substance on the floor alone is insufficient to establish liability without additional evidence that the store had notice of the condition.

Outcome
The Court agreed with the defense, noting the absence of footprints, cart tracks, drying, or other evidence indicating how long the substance had been present. Finding no genuine issues of material fact, the Court granted the Defendant's Amended Motion for Summary Judgment and entered final judgment in favor of the Defendant.

The ruling reinforces the importance of proving that a business knew or should have known about a dangerous condition before an incident, rather than relying on speculation to establish liability in Florida slip-and-fall cases.