Wal-Mart Stores East, LP v. Johnson

Summary

The Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed a final judgment for Joseph Johnson in his negligence action against Wal-Mart Stores East, LP. The court held that the independent contractor defense did not bar Johnson's claim because evidence supported the exception for a property owner that negligently creates or approves a dangerous condition and has constructive knowledge of it. The court also concluded that the trial court properly denied Wal-Mart's motions for summary judgment and directed verdict.

Holdings

1. A property owner generally is not liable for injuries to an independent contractor's employee during contracted work, but the defense does not apply when the property owner negligently creates or negligently approves a dangerous condition of which it has actual or constructive knowledge.
2. Wal-Mart could not use Johnson's independent-contractor status to avoid its duty as a business owner to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition because the evidence supported the negligent-dangerous-condition exception.
3. The trial court properly denied Wal-Mart's motion for summary judgment and its motions for directed verdict because Johnson presented sufficient evidence to support his negligence and premises-liability claim.
4. Wal-Mart did not establish reversible error from the trial court's refusal to give its requested independent-contractor instruction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Wal-Mart could invoke the independent contractor defense as a matter of law to avoid liability for injuries sustained by Johnson while performing contracted work on Wal-Mart's premises.
2. Whether the evidence established the exception for a property owner that negligently creates or approves a dangerous condition, including actual or constructive knowledge of that condition.
3. Whether the trial court erred in denying Wal-Mart's motions for summary judgment and directed verdict.
4. Whether the trial court's refusal to give Wal-Mart's requested jury instruction on the independent contractor defense constituted reversible error.

Disposition

affirmed