Megal v. Green Bay Area Visitor & Convention Bureau, Inc., 274 Wis. 2d 162

Summary

The Supreme Court of Wisconsin held that Nancy Megal's safe-place claim was properly dismissed because the record lacked evidence establishing constructive notice of the french fry that caused her fall or expert evidence concerning the Arena's required maintenance practices. The court held, however, that failure to establish a safe-place violation does not preclude a common-law negligence claim based on a negligent act. It affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. The Bureau was entitled to summary judgment on Megal's safe-place claim because Megal presented neither evidence of how long the french fry had been on the stair nor expert testimony establishing that the Arena was not as safe as the nature of the enterprise reasonably permitted.
2. A plaintiff may pursue a common-law negligence claim even if the plaintiff cannot prove a violation of Wisconsin's safe-place statute, because the safe-place statute addresses unsafe conditions and imposes a higher standard of care, while common-law negligence addresses negligent acts and imposes an ordinary-care duty.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the undisputed evidence established constructive notice of the french fry sufficient to support a violation of Wisconsin's safe-place statute.
2. Whether a plaintiff may maintain a common-law negligence claim when the plaintiff cannot establish a violation of the higher standard of care imposed by Wisconsin's safe-place statute.
3. What standard governs review of the circuit court's summary judgment decision.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded