Court Opinion

ID: 9571375
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 20:31:15.412798+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:30:22.185472
License: Public Domain

*728Newton, J.,
concurring.
I concur in the opinion of Spencer, J., but cannot agree with the statement of White, C. J., that the case of Kozloski v. Modern Litho, Inc., 182 Neb. 270, 154 N. W. 2d 460, is thereby overruled. Obviously this is incorrect. As pointed out in the majority opinion, the facts of that case ¡are substantially different from those in the present one. In Kozloski there was no notice of a condition conducive to the formation of ice as here nor did it appear conditions were such that the ice could reasonably have been expected to be discovered. The only similarity is in weather conditions. Here the defendant was aware that ice had been forming and that the conditions producing it persisted. In other words, she knew of the dangerous condition and took no steps to abate it or warn against it. The primary distinction is in what a reasonably prudent person should anticipate.