Court Opinion

ID: 9854552
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 06:09:07.090865+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:23:08.999513
License: Public Domain

Beasley, Judge,
concurring specially.
I concur in the judgment only, because there is evidence which would support a reasonable inference that what plaintiff slipped on *751was water coming from the employee’s activity of “prepping” vegetables, indicating some lack of care.
Decided March 18, 1988
Rehearing denied April 1, 1988
B. B. Earle, Jr., for appellants.
William C. Sanders, for appellees.
Thus this case differs from Bright v. Food Giant, 177 Ga. App. 641 (340 SE2d 272) (1986) and Newman v. Ruby Tuesday, Inc., 184 Ga. App. 827 (363 SE2d 26) (1987), where there was no evidence to support an inference that the foreign substance was on the floor due to the action of defendant or one of its employees. As quoted in Bright, supra at 642: “Georgia courts have uniformly held that where the customer slips on a substance placed on the floor by others than the owner, it is necessary to prove that the defendant had knowledge or that under the circumstances he was chargeable with constructive knowledge of its existence.’ [Cits.]” (Emphasis supplied.) These two cases should not be overruled.