Tavai v. Walmart Stores, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtQuinn-Brintnall, J.
¶1 In a slip-and-fall premises liability case, the plaintiff ordinarily must prove that the *126defendant had notice of the dangerous condition that caused the fall. Under the limited “self-service” exception to this requirement, notice need not be shown if the dangerous condition is continuous or foreseeably inherent in the nature of the defendant’s business or mode of operation. The appellant here slipped on a wet floor in a Walmart store about 15 feet away from a check-out counter. Because the appellant failed to provide evidence that Walmart had notice of the wet floor or a condition…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Young v. Key Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1989
- Lybbert v. Grant CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2000
- Tincani v. Inland Empire Zoological SocietyWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- Pimentel v. Roundup CompanyWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- Henderson v. TyrrellCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1996
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Raymond Cook et ux v. Tarbert Logging, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- Ann P. Gores, App/cross-res. v. Safeway, Inc., Res/cross-app.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2014
- Cindy & Matthew Holttum, Apps. v. Ross Stores, Inc.,et Al., Resps.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2013
- Compton v. Target CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2025
- Galassi v. Lowe's Home Centers, LLCWashington Supreme Court · 2025
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.