Fox v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
Mrs. J. A. Fox v. the Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company.
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
Since there is no evidence of how the beet got upon the floor of the aisle, or of how long the beet had been upon the floor before the plaintiff stepped on it, there is no evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant. The defendant is not an insurer of the safety of those who enter its store for the purpose of making purchases, and the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is not applicable. Before the plaintiff can recover she must, by evidence, establish actionable negligence on .the part of the defendant, Bowden v. Kress, 198 N. C., 559 ;
Cooke v. Tea Co., 204 N. C., 495 , and this she has failed to do.
The judgment is , Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 19 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.