Case ID: f-appx_693/html/0462-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cheryl KELLY Plaintiff-Appellant v. FOUR B. CORPORATION, doing business as Price Chopper; Modern Maintenance, Inc. Defendants-Appellees
    No. 16-3852
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 13, 2017
    Filed: July 17, 2017
    
      Jason M. Pottenger, Pottenger Law Firm, Kansas City, MO, Sophie Wood-worth, Kansas City, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellant
    Robert Luder, Lesley Renfro Willson, Luder & Weist, Overland Park, KS, for Defendant-Appellee Four B. Corporation
    Jennifer R. Johnson, Michelle Rene Stewart, Hinkle Law Firm LLC, Overland Park, KS, for Defendant-Appellee Modern Maintenance, Inc.
    Before BENTON, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges,
   PER CURIAM.

Cheryl Kelly appeals from an order of the District Court granting summary judgment for the defendants in her removed personal-injury action arising out of a slip- and-fall incident at a grocery store. After de novo review of the record, we conclude that the evidence shows a genuine issue of material fact that precluded summary judgment. See Pippin v. Hill-Rom Co., 615 F.3d 886, 889 (8th Cir. 2010) (standard of review). The evidence, which included video surveillance footage of the • incident, would permit a finder of fact to conclude that one or both defendants were negligent under Missouri law. See id. (recognizing the elements of a Missouri negligence claim as a duty of care, a breach of that duty, and a proximately-caused resulting injury); Smith v. Callaway Bank, 359 S.W.3d 545, 547 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012) (“Whether a defendant’s conduct falls short of the standard of care is generally a question of fact for the jury.”).

Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.