Legal Opinion

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Gonzalez

Texas Supreme Court

Decided May 8, 1998No. 97-1030PublishedCited by 425 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGonzalez, Justice

in which HECHT, ENOCH, OWEN and BAKER, Justices, joined.

The question in this slip-and-fall case is what quantum of circumstantial evidence is legally sufficient to support a finding that an unreasonably dangerous condition has existed long enough to charge a proprietor with constructive notice of the condition. The court of appeals held that there was legally sufficient evidence that some macaroni salad had existed on the Wal-Mart floor long enough to charge Wal-Mart with constructive notice of the condition. 954 S.W.2d 777, 780. We hold that when circumstantial evidence is relied upon to…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Continental Coffee Products Co. v. CazarezTexas Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Keetch v. Kroger Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Corbin v. Safeway Stores, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1983
  4. Browning-Ferris, Inc. v. ReynaTexas Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Rosas v. Buddies Food StoreTexas Supreme Court · 1975

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by425 opinions

  1. City of Keller v. WilsonTexas Supreme Court · 2005
  2. MacK Trucks, Inc. v. TamezTexas Supreme Court · 2006
  3. Texas Department of Transportation v. AbleTexas Supreme Court · 2000
  4. MBM Financial Corp. v. Woodlands Operating Co.Texas Supreme Court · 2009
  5. CMH Homes, Inc. v. DaenenTexas Supreme Court · 2000

420 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API