Woman Files Premises Liability Lawsuit Against Menards After Door Falls on Her
A federal judge in Illinois recently ruled that a customer, who claims she was injured when a display door fell on her while shopping at Menards, has provided sufficient evidence for a jury to consider whether the company can be held liable in a premises liability lawsuit.
The decision was reached by U.S. District Judge Nancy L. Maldonado of the Northern District of Illinois on July 1. She denied Menard Inc.’s motion for summary judgment, which led to the disputed conditions regarding issues of duty, breach, and proximate cause for a jury to decide.
According to the lawsuit, the plaintiff was shopping at the Menards location in Evergreen Park, Illinois, in March 2019. She was discussing the dimensions of one door with a family member when she was allegedly struck by a different door, which she claimed fell from a display. Following the incident, the plaintiff filed a personal injury lawsuit seeking monetary damages of more than $50,000. She claims she sustained personal, permanent, and monetary injuries as a result of the accident.
Menard Inc. moved for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s premises liability and negligence claims. The defendant argued that it didn’t owe the plaintiff a duty to warn or protect her from an open and obvious condition. Further, the defendant claims, even if it did, it didn’t breach that duty as it didn’t create the dangerous condition or have notice of it, nor did it approximately cause her injuries.
The judge rejected Menard’s motion concerning its premises liability and negligence claims, concluding many of the disputed claims should go before a jury.
The court was not persuaded by Menard’s citing of a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit opinion Dunn v. Menard. In that case, a 16-foot stack of insulation fell on the plaintiff while he was loading a roll of insulation into his vehicle in a Menards self-service yard. The Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that the insulation stack was an “open and obvious condition such that Menard did not owe the plaintiff a duty of care,” according to the opinion. The court found that the Dunn case was factually distinguishable from the current case.
The court cited testimony from the plaintiff and her granddaughter that some of the door stacks seemed straighter than the others and that the one that fell was set up “weird”, so they didn’t want to touch the doors for fear that they would fall. Ultimately, the court concluded that a reasonable person would not necessarily have recognized the risk. Hence, the issue of whether or not Menards was at fault should be determined by a jury.
Talk to a Springfield, IL Personal Injury Lawyer Today
Patel Law, PC represents the interests of Illinois residents who have been injured due to the negligence of another party. If you have suffered an injury on premises, call our Springfield personal injury lawyers today to schedule a consultation, and we can begin investigating your case right away.
Source:
law.com/2024/07/05/negligence-premises-liability-claims-against-menards-up-to-a-jury-to-decide-federal-judge-rules/?slreturn=20250106125359
