Legal Opinion

Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc.

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 17, 1985No. 84-1425PublishedCited by 357 opinions

1Per curiam

The sole issue presented for our determination is whether the trial court erred in holding as a matter of law that appellees did not breach the duty owed appellant as a business invitee.1

A shopkeeper owes business invitees a duty of ordinary care in maintaining the premises in a reasonably safe condition so that its customers are not unnecessarily and unreasonably exposed to danger. See Campbell v. Hughes Provision Co. (1950), 153 Ohio St. 9 [41 O.O.107]. A shopkeeper is not, however, an insurer of the customer’s safety. Further, a shopkeeper is under no duty to protect business invitees from…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sidle v. HumphreyOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  2. S. S. Kresge Co. v. FaderOhio Supreme Court · 1927
  3. Boles v. Montgomery Ward & Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Campbell v. Hudges Provision Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Rayburn v. J. C. Penney Outlet StoreOhio Court of Appeals · 1982

3Cited by357 opinions

  1. Armstrong v. Best Buy Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Simmers v. Bentley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
  3. Kay v. Marc Glassman, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1996
  4. McGuire v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1996
  5. Carnes v. SiferdOhio Court of Appeals · 2011

352 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