Ohio Appellate Court applies actual constructive notice doctrine to defeat mall complex patron’s premises liability action.

Fall incidents in business parking lots present one of the most common types of premises liability claims impacting premises owners large and small. In Hudzik, Ohio’s Eleventh Appellate District applied Ohio’s actual constructive notice doctrine to defeat such a claim involving a patron’s fall that took place in the parking lot of a mall complex located in Niles, Ohio. In that case, Lori Hudzik was walking to her car after leaving an Office Max located in the Eastwood Mall Complex when the wheel of her shopping cart got caught in a water-filled pothole/depression, causing her to fall and injure herself. On summary judgment, the court found the actual constructive notice doctrine barred Hudzik’s premises liability claim as a matter of law. In particular, the court concluded that there was no evidence that the mall had any actual notice of the alleged defective condition existing in the parking lot. The mall had not received any complaints regarding the condition of the parking lot prior to the time of the fall. In addition, the court concluded that there was no evidence that the mall had constructive notice of any hazardous condition because Hudzik failed to produce any evidence as to the length of time that the alleged defective condition existed. Combined, Hudzik was precluded from maintaining an actionable premises liability claim against the mall complex. 

_{Case Law Alerts, 2^nd Quarter, April 2018}

_{Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2018 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}