Opinion ID: 585918
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: directed verdict on negligent-stacking-of-boxes theory

Text: 39 The plaintiffs complain that the district court erred by excluding a videotape that discussed safety at Wal-Mart stores and by granting the defendant a directed verdict on the negligent-stacking-of-boxes theory. 40 We conclude, however, that the district court did not err by excluding the videotape because it appears to lack relevance under the circumstances of this case. The purpose of the potentially relevant portion of the videotape was not to demonstrate methods of stacking merchandise. 41 The district court did not abuse its discretion by directing a verdict for the defendant on this theory because we conclude that the evidence clearly indicates that the stacking of the box in question did not contribute to causing the accident. Rather, it was the alleged negligence of the defendant's employee not to tell the plaintiff to stand clear, and his failure to handle the box without mishap that caused the accident. The evidence established that the box was very stable on the shelf, was not overhanging and was at a height which was in accordance with company policy. The height of the box was not shown to be a problem where a ladder was available as in this case. We find no merit, therefore, in the plaintiffs' contention.