Legal Opinion · Dissent

Shrum v. Southern Farm Casualty Insurance

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided February 22, 1993No. 92-832Published

1DissentRobert L. Brown, Justice

This decision infers negligence from the existence of some “soapy looking” substance on the bathroom floor. No proof was presented on how it got there — the appellant said in deposition that he did not know — or how long it had been on the floor. Yet, the majority reverses a summary judgment in favor of Southern Farm.

This runs counter to longstanding case law:

[T] he presence of a foreign or slick substance which causes a slip and fall is not alone sufficient to prove negligence. It must be proved that the substance was negligently placed there or allowed to remain.

Diebold v. Vanderstek, 364…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Bank of Malvern v. DunklinSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
  2. Sanders v. BanksSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1992
  3. Safeway Stores, Inc. v. WillmonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1986
  4. Collyard v. American Home Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1980
  5. Boykin v. Mr. Tidy Car Wash, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1987

9 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