Lamb

Lamb v. Purity Stores, Inc.

Good Law
119 Cal. App. 690·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 148·7 P.2d 197
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 16, 1932Docket No. 7949.California544 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Sturtevant, J.

The plaintiff while purchasing articles in the defendant’s store fell to the floor. For the injury that she sustained she commenced this action to recover damages. She named the corporate owner and also the manager of the store as defendants. The trial court made findings in favor of the plaintiff and from a judgment entered thereon the defendants have appealed.

The defendants earnestly contend that the evidence was insufficient to support the findings of negligence. However, we think that it cannot be said that there was no evidence to support the findings. Both parties state that it is not negligence to have and maintain an oiled floor, and when the floor is properly oiled it is not slippery. There is evidence in the record to the effect that the oil that was used was a floor oil properly prepared by a competent manufacturer; that the floor where the accident happened is a reasonably good pine floor; that the ordinary method of treating the floor of a store is to apply the oil on Saturday night after the store closes; that the oil should be applied in a thin coat with a wet mop; and that after it has been so applied the operator should go over the,.floor and mop the surface…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.