Court Opinion

ID: 3742290
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-06 07:05:41.698848+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:21:26.078154
License: Public Domain

I concur in the majority's conclusion ". . . appellant did not establish the automatic door was in the exclusion management and control of Bag-N-Save Foods." (Majority Opinion at 5). However, unlike the majority, I do not so conclude because the individual patrons of the store control the operation of the automatic door by entering and exiting the store. Such fact does not preclude application of res ipsaloquitur in the case sub judice.
However, I do agree appellant's affidavit does not demonstrate she had personal knowledge appellee had exclusive control of the management and maintenance of the automatic doors at the time of the injury as required by Civ. R. 56(E).
                                      ------------------------ JUDGE WILLIAM B. HOFFMAN
For the reasons stated in the Memorandum-Opinion on file, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of Tuscarawas County, Ohio, is affirmed.
----------------------
----------------------
                                         ---------------------- JUDGES