Pilie v. National Food Stores of Louisiana, Inc.

I think plaintiffs should be permitted to recover in this case because they have established facts from which an inference of negligence on the part of defendant supermarket can fairly' be drawn and, particularly so, since defendant failed to offer any evidence to show that it had exercised ordinary care to keep its premises reasonably safe for its patrons.

Unlike the majority, I find no difficulty whatever in resolving that res ipsa loquitur applies to the facts of this case. I, of course, acknowledge that the rule is correctly stated in Larkin v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., 233…