Briel v. Dollar General Store, 2007-A-0016 (11-16-2007)
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Dissent
{¶ 41} The trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of appellee, Dollar General Store, was correct. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
{¶ 42} The three essential elements of any negligence action are a duty, the breach of that duty, and an injury proximately caused by the breach. Wellman v. East Ohio Gas. Co. (1953), 160 Ohio St. 103, paragraph three of the syllabus. In the present case, reasonable minds can only conclude that there was neither a duty nor the breach of a duty on the part of Dollar General.
{¶ 43} "A shopkeeper ordinarily owes its business invitees a duty of ordinary…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Armstrong v. Best Buy Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 2003
- Simmers v. Bentley Construction Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1992
- S. S. Kresge Co. v. FaderOhio Supreme Court · 1927
- Jeswald v. HuttOhio Supreme Court · 1968
- McGuire v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.