Slip and Fall Plaintiff Gets Another Swing
The Illinois Appellate Court recently gave the plaintiff another bite at the apple in a slip and fall case against Wal-Mart. In Cano v Wal-Mart stores Inc., the plaintiff claimed injury from allegedly slipping on a soapy substance at the Northlake Wal-Mart.
Wal-Mart filed a motion for summary judgment claiming it had no actual or constructive notice. In the plaintiff’s deposition she claimed that she overheard an employee tell his supervisor that he had already been told to clean up the substance. Wal-Mart addressed this claim by arguing that the statement was inadmissible hearsay and not trustworthy because of inaccuracies of the names of the employees.
The plaintiff not only failed to file a written response to the motion but did not attend the hearing on the motion. The hearing was rescheduled and the plaintiff, once again, did not attend. Circuit Judge Sheldon Harris granted the motion. Plaintiff moved for the court to reconsider but was denied. She then appealed to the Appellate Court.
In the order from the Appellate court, Justice Hoffman reversed the District Court and remanded the case back for further proceedings. The court ruled that the statement at issue constituted an admission by Wal-Mart and that the plaintiff “presented at least some evidence that Wal-Mart had actual notice of the spilled detergent prior to the slip and fall.”
Illinois courts have once again shown their propensity to give plaintiffs every opportunity to keep their case alive even when plaintiffs fail to respond or even attend briefing hearings on motions for summary judgment.
