### No. 12121 IN

### THE 

### SUPREME COURT OF THE 

### STATE OF 

### MONTANA

MARGARET 

### LAURIE, Plaintiff and Appellant,



### M & 

### L

### REALTY CORPORATION, Defendant and Respondent,

Appeal from: District Court of theThirteenth Judicial District, Honorable Charles Luedke, Judgepresiding. Counsel of Record: Fox 

### Appellant

### : William T, Kelly argued, Billings, Montana. Keefer and Roybal, Billings, Montana. For Respondent

### : Crowley, Kilbourne, Haughey, Hanson & 

### Gallagher, Billings, Montana, StephenH. 

### Foster argued, Billings, Montana.

Submitted: May 16, 1972 Decided:Mr. JusticeWesley Castles delivered the Opinion of the Court.

This isan appeal from a judgment of the district court of the thirteenthjudicial district, Yellowstone'County, entered after the court directed a verdict infavor of defendant atthe close of the case. Plaintiff, Margaret Laurie, brought action torecover damages for injuries sustained ina falldown a stairway. Plaintiff was an employee of Colborn School Supply, Inc. Defendant, M & L Realty Corporation owned the building inwhich Colborn operated 

### itsbusiness. Colborn leased a portion of thebuilding from defendant and occupied allof the main floor of the building, except one corner room which was used by the Bookmobile Service for the Billings Parmly Library. Colborn utilized its space on the main floor primarily for offices, freight receiving and ship- ?ing, and a retail store it was developing. The second floor of the buildingwas used by Colborn as a storage place for its merchandise, and as a receiving-shipping department. A stairway and an elevator locatedwithin the space occupied by Colborn provided access between the two floors. The condition of the stairwaywhen Colborn firsttook possession under itslease

was not shown. The only evidence relative to the condition of the stairwaywas plaintiff's own testimony and the testimony of Joanne Rost, an employee of Colborn, who began working about sixteen months before plaintiff fellon the stairs. Both witnesses testified that the stairswere old and steep, aswell as cupped, rounded and worn. A handrailwas located on one side of the stairway, but not on the other. The stairwaywas illuminated by

a window atthe top and one lightbulb. A heavy metal door atthe top of the stairs opened onto the landing. Plaintiff startedworking for Colborn about four months prior to the day she fellon the stairs. Her job as a clerk in

### the retail store Colborn was establishing on the main floor frequently required her to move merchandise stored on the second floor down to the retail store on the first or main floor. When she had heavy loads of merchandise to move, she loaded it into a cart and used the freight elevator. She handcarried lighter items down the stairs. She had been up and down the stairshundreds of times during the time she worked for Colborn, and according to her own testimony,knew the condition of the stairway. Occasionally, a customer of Colbornwould go up the stairs to the second floor of the building to look at merchandise. Plaintiff felldown the stairs on November 25, 1966, while carrying merchandise from the second floor to a customer in the retail store. The complaint allegeswith particularity that the stairwaywas dangerous because 

### (1) the door at the top was unsafe, (2) therewas no handrail on the left side, 

### (3) the top stepwas slippery,and 

### (4) the lightingwas inadequate. However,plaintiff's entire testimony on direct examination regarding the cause of her fall consisted only of the following

question and answer: 

### "Q. Would you please tell us why you fell. "A. Well, as 

### I see it,when 

### Ihad to come to the doorwith my packages inmy left hand, 

### Ipushed with my right arm,being right-handed,and a little bit with my right shoulder to help me start the door opening. 

### I stepped over to one sidewith my parcels in my left hand and waited for the door to start closing. You're in a small, kind of an inconvenient patternwhen you do this. you're standing over away from the stair landing as you'rewaiting for the door to close. And then 

### Icarreback a couple of steps and got my self ready formy descent. 

### Igrabbed the handrail and started off the first step and fell." 

### la in tiff's testimony on cross-examinationadded this: The door. With respect to 

### the door at the top of the stairs, she testified: "Q. And you opened the doorwith your righthand and right shoulder? 

### A. Right."Q. And then you stepped onto the landing at the top? 

### A. Yes. "Q. As I understand it,you allowed the door to close? A. It had closed, yes, when I started down the stairs. "Q. The door had already closed behind you when you starteddown the stairs. A. Yes. "Q. And the door didn't bump you or anythingwhen it closed. A. No. 11 Lack of railing on left side. Plaintiff's testimony firmly established that the lack of a railing on the left sidehad nothing to do with her fall. She testified: "Q. As I understand it,with your right hand you grabbed onto the railing, isthat right? A. I reached over for the right-hand railing, yes. "Q. And you actually got your hand onto the railing, didn't you? A. I had ahold of it. "Q. And, of course, the lefthand had merchandise in it,didn't it? A. Right.II Illumination. Plaintiff admitted that the lighting conditions were not responsible forher accident. She testified with respect to the lighting: "Q. Now, where were you looking as you started down the stairs? A. Looking down towards my feet. "Q. And you could seeyour feet, couldn't you? A. Yes.

IIQ. You could also see the stairs? A. Yes. "Q. It was light enough so you could seeboth your feet and the stairs. A. I did see them, yes. "Q. So that the lighting really didn't have much to do with your fall then, did it? A. Not initself, no, sir.II know That plaintiff did notlwhether her fallwas caused by the condition of the steps orby some other factor isillustratedby this testimony: "Q. Now, after you fellyou went back up the stairs ---you remember your testimony----to see if therewas any extraneous object on the stairs that would have caused you to fall. A. Would you say that again? 

### I didn't hear that."Q. Later inthe day afteryou fellyou went upstairs to see iftherewas anything, any extraneous object on the stairs. 

### A. Yes, I did. 'Q. And you didn't find anything? 

### A. I never found anything, no. I' Although the stairwaywas described as "slick" or

11slippery'' inplaintiff's complaint and inher brief, there is

no evidence to establish this allegation. Neither plaintiff nor Joanne Rost testified that the staFrswere slippery. The foregoing facts arewhat are contained inthe abbreviated record on appeal. The trialcourt granted defendant's motion for a directed verdict on the ground that the evidence failed to establish the existence of a duty owing fromM & L Realty Corporation toplaintiff. Defendant alsourges that the evidence failed to establish plaintiff's fallwas caused by the condition of the stairway, rather than from some other factor. The issue urged on appeal 

### iswhether the district,court erred ingranting a directedverdict. We add that ifthe district court was correct in

### itsconclusion, it 

### isimmaterial what reasons
were assigned therefor. Advance-Rumely Thresher Co. v, Kruger, 

### 93Mont. 66, 

### 72, 16 P.2d 1102, 1104. Here, the evidence simply failed to establish that the condition of the stairway caused appellant's fall. Appellant did not blame the fal'l on the stairway; she testified that 

### "I came back a couple of steps and got myself ready formy descent. I grabbed the handrail and started off the first stepand fell." On cross-examination she excluded the possibility that the door atthe top of the stairs, the lighting, or the lack of a handrail

on the left side caused her to fall. There was no evidence that the stepswere slippery. It 

### is fundmental that the evidence must tend not only to show thenegligence alleged, but also the causal

### connectionbetween it 

### and the injury. Jackson v. William Dingwall Co., 

### 145 Mont. 

### 127, 134, 

### 399 P.2d 

### 236, 240. Under the evidence inthis record the cause of the fallis

a matter of conjecture. The fact that later inthe day she checked the stairway to see if she fellon some extraneous object demonstrates she does not know what caused her fall. Having reviewed the abbreviated record and the issues presented, we findno error. The judgment isaffirmed.

~ssociats Justice

Associate Justices.