IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLAIM FOR RELIEF. (Negligence)

Transcription

1 //1 :: PM 1CV Page 1 REBECCA R. LOPRINZI, v. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH Plaintiff, FRED MEYER STORES, INC., S.D. DEACON CORP. OF OREGON, an Oregon corporation, and QUESTMARK CORPORATION, a Pennsylvania corporation, and JOHN DOES 1-, Plaintiff alleges: Defendants. Case No. CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Negligence 1. COMPLAINT (NEGLIGENCE PLAINTIFF S CLAIMED DAMAGES: $0, NOT SUBJECT TO MANDATORY ARBITRATION Jury Trial Demanded FEE AUTHORITY: ORS.0(1(a Plaintiff Rebecca R. Loprinzi ( Plaintiff, at all materials times, has been a resident of the City of Sandy, County of Clackamas, State of Oregon.. Defendant Fred Meyer Stores, Inc. ( Fred Meyer is a foreign corporation doing business in Oregon. Fred Meyer at all material times has conducted business as a grocery store at SW Pacific Highway, Portland, Oregon (the Fred Meyer Store. Though the Fred Meyer Store is located in Washington County, Fred Meyer has at all material times also COMPLAINT (NEGLIGENCE

2 conducted business at other grocery stores located in Multnomah County. At all material times, Fred Meyer has owned, operated, leased, and/or controlled the Fred Meyer Store. Defendant S.D. Deacon Corp. of Oregon ( Deacon is a domestic corporation doing business in Oregon. At all material times Deacon has conducted business in Multnomah County. Defendant QuestMark Corporation ( QuestMark is a foreign corporation doing business in Oregon. At all material times QuestMark has conducted business in Multnomah County.. Deacon, as a general contractor, QuestMark, as a subcontractor, and John Does 1- are individual(s or business entity/ies either employed by Fred Meyer or contracted with by Fred Meyer to develop, install and/or maintain reasonably safe polished floors at the Fred Meyer Store, who in addition to Fred Meyer, are also substantially responsible for and contributed to failure of Fred Meyer, as described herein this Complaint, to provide a reasonably safe shopping area for Fred Meyer s customers. Plaintiff is ignorant to the actual names of Defendants John Does 1-. At the time when Plaintiff discovers the true name for any or all of Defendants John Does 1-, Plaintiff will amend her pleadings consistent with ORCP H.. On May, 1, at all material times, Plaintiff was Fred Meyer s invitee, lawfully at the Fred Meyer Store as a commercial customer engaging in grocery shopping. Plaintiff was not a regular customer at the Fred Meyer Store, but was a regular customer at another Fred Meyer store location, located in Sandy, Oregon, where Plaintiff was accustomed to flooring that she perceived as reasonably safe, reasonably slip resistant, and with a reasonable level of crack related hazards. Fred Meyer had the duty to use due care for Plaintiff s safety, to make and keep the shopping area, at the Fred Meyer Store, reasonably safe.. On May, 1, Fred Meyer was aware or reasonably should have been aware of the hazardous condition of the floors at the Fred Meyer Store, with the Fred Meyer Store having Page COMPLAINT (NEGLIGENCE

3 recently been remodeled with Fred Meyer having decided to polish and use as its flooring the old, cracked, cement that previously was only sub-surface for the prior flooring materials. Fred Meyer failed to use reasonable diligence to either remedy the hazard or warn Plaintiff and other customers of the hazard, despite Fred Meyer having reasonable time and opportunity to do so.. Fred Meyer s conduct, as well as that of the contractor and general contractor, Deacon and QuestMark, and John Does 1-, unreasonably caused a foreseeable risk of harm, that Plaintiff, or another customer, would slip and/or trip and fall on the slippery and jagged floor and injure themselves. The law protects Plaintiff and other customers from this unreasonably created risk of harm. All Defendants knew or should have known the risks and dangers of failing to reasonably develop, install, and/or maintain the floors, and remedy or adequately warn its customers of the slippery floor.. On May, 1, at approximately noon, Plaintiff was checking out with her purchases, but had a coupon for cheese that she wanted to purchase. Plaintiff had been unable to find the cheese section. Plaintiff, who was fifty-five ( years old at that time, had her two youngest children with her, ages and, and asked the checkout clerk if she could have Fred Meyer personnel grab the cheese for her, consistent with the practice, at the other Fred Meyer store where Plaintiff shops, in Sandy, Oregon. The checkout clerk informed Plaintiff where the cheese section was and directed Plaintiff to grab the item herself, instructing her to just go fast, offering to watch Plaintiff s cart and three-year old child, who was sitting in the large section of the grocery cart. The cheese section was on the back wall of the store. As instructed, Plaintiff hurried, with her older child, through the store, and while returning from retrieving the cheese, she tripped and slipped on the floor near or on one of the cracks on the polished concrete flooring, with her feet slipping out from under her and her body slamming back down into the ground, impacting her wrist, back, shoulder and head. Page COMPLAINT (NEGLIGENCE

4 Fred Meyer, Deacon, QuestMark and John Does 1- failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent foreseeable harm in one or more of the following non-exclusive list of particulars: a. In failing to reasonably choose, during the remodel of the Fred Meyer Store, a flooring style that was reasonably safe with a reasonable level of slip resistance for Fred Meyer customers; b. In failing, during and after the remodeling of the Fred Meyer Store, to reasonably test the safety and slip resistance of the floor in assuring the safety for customers; c. In failing to reasonably provide regular maintenance of the polished and cracked concrete flooring, using the correct cleaning chemicals and not allowing unreasonable debris and/or chemical buildup; d. In failing to reasonably address the cracks in the flooring, during the remodel and/or afterward, to provide a reasonable level of trip-free flooring surface for its customers; e. In failing to reasonably warn its customers, with signage, of the hazards of the slippery and cracked floor throughout the store; f. In failing to reasonably develop and/or implement reasonable policy, to train its employees, in certain circumstances, to reasonably advise and warn customers of the hazards of the slippery and cracked floor, and to never instruct a customer to hurry or go fast through the Fred Meyer Store; g. In failing to reasonably develop and/or implement reasonable policy, to train its employees, to have Fred Meyer personnel retrieve grocery items for customers who are already proceeding through the checkout process, rather than requiring that the customer hurry through the store to retrieve a final item for their grocery list while the clerk and other customers wait.. As a direct result of Fred Meyer s conduct, and the conduct of Deacon, QuestMark and John Does 1-, Plaintiff sustained injury, causing Plaintiff to experience weakness in her body, Page COMPLAINT (NEGLIGENCE

5 blurred vision and faintness and dizziness. Plaintiff s head ached for three days after the fall. Plaintiff sustained multiple contusions on her body and caused a flare up of Plaintiff s fibromyalgia condition. Plaintiff s ankles, back, hip and shoulder became swollen and ached. Plaintiff also fractured her thoracic vertebra during the fall, causing numbness and shooting pain/tingling in her left arm and left leg. Plaintiff was referred to physical therapy for the spine fracture as well as for muscle and soft tissue injury. The fall affected Plaintiff s overall strength, her sleep and the level of pain medication needed for pain and inflammation. As a result of her injury, Plaintiff has suffered economic and non-economic damages, including pain and suffering and emotional distress, medical bills and costs related to medical services, in an amount determined by a jury to be fair, but not exceed the sum of $0,000.. Plaintiff reserves the right to amend this complaint consistent with additional discovery, including to add a claim for punitive damages, under ORS 1., related to Defendants disregard of Plaintiff s and others rights. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Fred Meyer in a sum determined by a jury to be fair, but not to exceed the sum of $0,000 and for costs and disbursements incurred herein. Dated this th day of May, 1. By: s/ Arusi R. Loprinzi Arusi R. Loprinzi, OSB No. 01 arusi@loprinzilaw.com Lake Oswego, OR 0 Phone: 0..0 Fax: 0..0 Page COMPLAINT (NEGLIGENCE