Lisa M. Goldin and Harold W. Goldin v. Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC d/b/a Lowe’s Home Improvement

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina denied Lowe’s Home Centers, LLC’s motion for summary judgment in a premises-liability action. Lisa and Harold Goldin alleged negligence, gross negligence, and recklessness after Lisa tripped over a security cable between lawn mowers. The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether Lowe’s should have anticipated the danger and whether its conduct contributed to the injury.

Holdings

1. Summary judgment was improper because the evidence created a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Lowe's should have anticipated that Goldin would encounter or fail to recognize the security cable despite its alleged open and obvious character, thereby requiring Lowe's to warn her or take other reasonable protective measures.
2. Lowe's was not entitled to summary judgment based on Goldin's alleged contributory negligence because comparison of the plaintiff's negligence with the defendant's negligence is a question of fact for the jury.
3. The record presented a triable dispute concerning the duty and breach elements of Plaintiffs' negligence claim, and Lowe's was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Lowe's was entitled to summary judgment on the ground that the security cable was an open and obvious condition for which it owed Goldin no duty to warn or protect her.
2. Whether the evidence created a genuine dispute of material fact concerning whether Lowe's should have anticipated harm despite the cable's alleged open and obvious nature.
3. Whether Goldin's alleged contributory negligence entitled Lowe's to summary judgment.

Disposition

other