Appeal, No. 35, April T., 1961, from judgment of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, April T., 1957, in case of Claire Ow v. Kroger Co. Judgment affirmed.
Harry Alan Sherman, for appellant.
William A. Challener, Jr., with him Frank J. Brown, Jr., for appellee.
Before Ervin, Wright, Woodside, Watkins, Montgomery, and Flood, JJ. (rhodes, P.j., absent).
[ 195 Pa. Super. Page 206]
This trespass action was brought to recover for injuries received by the plaintiff when she fell over a mat in a store as she was carrying two bags of groceries.
The court below granted the defendant's motion for judgment n.o.v., and refused plaintiff's motion for a
[ 195 Pa. Super. Page 207]
new trial, after a verdict for the plaintiff in the amount of $1250.
The plaintiff entered the Kroger Market in Pittsburgh about 9 o'clock in the morning and purchased groceries and meat. The purchases were checked by the cashier and placed into two large paper bags. The cashier handed her one of the bags. She says she remonstrated that it was too heavy, but she took it. The cashier handed her the other bag. She says she again remonstrated that it was too heavy, but she took it. While she was carrying the two bags out of the store, she tripped and fell over a turned up corner of a mat. She was helped up by a clerk, went to her car and drove it to the post office and then went to work at the place of her employment where she remained all day.
As the plaintiff was a business visitor, the defendant owed her the duty of keeping its premises in a reasonably safe condition, and of correcting any unsafe condition which was discoverable by the exercise of reasonable care. The defendant was not an insurer and the mere happening of an accident did not impose liability upon it. Parker v. McCrory Stores Corp., 376 Pa. 122, 124, 125, 101 A.2d 377 (1954); Hess v. Sun Ray Drug Co., 387 Pa. 199, 200, 201, 127 A.2d 699 (1956); Lanni v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 371 Pa. 106, 110, 88 A.2d 887 (1952); Hartigan v. Clark, 401 Pa. 594, 605, 165 A.2d 647 (1960); Cutler v. Dushoff, 192 Pa. Superior Ct. 37, 159 A.2d 524 (1960).
For the plaintiff to recover, it was incumbent upon her to prove that the condition of which she complained was the result of the direct negligence of an employee of defendant, or that defendant had sufficient constructive notice of the defect to have enabled ...