Maria Gomez vs. Food 4 Less of California, Inc., et al

Case Background

Plaintiff Maria Gomez filed the Slip and Fall lawsuit on January 22, 2019, in the California State, Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Case number: 19STCV01629). Judges Frederick C. Shaller, Lisa R. Jaskol, Cherol J. Nellon, and Daniel M. Crowley presided over the case.

Cause

On October 2, 2017, Maria Gomez entered the Food 4 Less grocery store at 8035 Webb Avenue in North Hollywood, California. She was an invited customer intending to purchase groceries. As she navigated the store aisles, Gomez encountered a hazardous condition—produce left on the floor. This neglected debris caused her to lose her footing and fall hard onto the store’s floor.

The complaint names multiple defendants: Food 4 Less of California, Inc., The Kroger Co., Alpha Beta Company, and Ralphs Grocery Company. These entities allegedly had ownership, control, or operational responsibilities for the store premises. The plaintiff asserts that these entities, individually and collectively, failed in their duty to maintain a safe shopping environment for customers like Gomez.

Injuries

The fall resulted in severe physical trauma to Gomez, most notably a fracture of her right patella (kneecap). This orthopedic injury caused immediate and intense pain, significantly impacting her mobility and quality of life. Beyond the fractured kneecap, Gomez reported damage to her nervous system, suggesting potential neurological complications from the incident.

The complaint emphasizes that Gomez experienced, and continues to endure, substantial physical pain and suffering due to slip and fall. Moreover, the legal filing expresses Gomez’s concern that some aspects of her injuries may lead to permanent disability. This concern is based on medical opinions or her ongoing symptoms, potentially affecting her long-term health and functionality.

Damages

The incident at Food 4 Less caused a cascade of financial and personal losses for Gomez. She incurred significant medical expenses for emergency treatment, diagnostic tests, and ongoing care related to her injuries. The complaint anticipates that Gomez will continue to require medical attention and incur associated costs well into the future, suggesting the need for long-term or rehabilitative care.

The injury also dealt a blow to Gomez’s professional life, impairing her earning capacity. This impairment manifested both in immediate lost wages due to her inability to work during recovery and in projected future earnings losses. This implies that her injuries may have long-lasting effects on her career prospects or work capabilities. Beyond these quantifiable economic damages, Gomez suffered substantial non-economic damages. These include physical pain, emotional distress, and a diminished quality of life resulting from the accident and its aftermath.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Maria Gomez
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Seph Nazarian, Esq.| Giancarlo Irribarren, Esq.
    • Experts for Plaintiff(s): Brad Avrit

 

  • Defendant(s): Food 4 Less of California, Inc. | The Kroger Co. dba Food For Less |  Alpha Beta Company dba Food For Less | Ralphs Grocery Company dba Food 4 Less
    • Counsel for Defendants: Gregory E. Stone | Giancarlo Irribaren, Esq

 Claims

 The complaint leverages two primary legal theories against the defendants in the Slip and Fall lawsuit:

Negligence: This claim centers on the defendants’ alleged failure to fulfill their duty of care to store patrons. Specifically, Gomez contends that the defendants:

a) Failed to maintain the store floor in a reasonably safe condition, allowing hazardous debris to remain in customer areas.

b) Neglected to promptly remove the produce from the floor, despite knowing (or having reason to know) that it posed an unreasonable risk to shoppers.

c) Did not provide adequate warnings to customers about the slipping hazard.

d) Generally failed to exercise due care in their management and operation of the store premises.

Premises Liability:  This cause of action focuses on the defendants’ responsibilities as property owners/operators. Gomez alleges that the defendants:

a) Carelessly owned, controlled, maintained, managed, inspected, and operated the store premises.

b) Allowed a dangerous and defective condition to exist on the property.

c) Knew or should have known about the hazardous condition but failed to take appropriate action.

d) Neglected to provide adequate warning, lighting, or notice of the danger to store patrons.

e) Failed to take necessary precautions to ensure customer safety in the area where the slippery substance was present.

In both claims, Gomez seeks compensation for her medical expenses, lost earnings, pain and suffering, and other damages resulting from the incident. The complaint demands a jury trial to adjudicate these claims and determine appropriate compensation.

Defense

The defense, represented by Food 4 Less of California, Inc. dba Food 4 Less, filed an answer to the plaintiff’s complaint. They asserted multiple affirmative defenses. They denied all allegations and claimed that the plaintiff failed to state a cause of action. The defense argued that the statute of limitations barred the plaintiff’s action. They also argued that the plaintiff’s own negligence contributed to or caused the alleged injuries.

They claimed the plaintiff failed to mitigate damages and that intervening or superseding causes were responsible for any injuries. The defense also asserted that other parties’ negligence should reduce their liability, if any. They argued that the plaintiff assumed the risk, abnormally used the premises, and that any hazardous condition was open and obvious.

Further, they claimed the doctrine of laches and unclean hands barred the plaintiff’s action. They argued there was no proximate cause between their actions and the plaintiff’s alleged injuries. They claimed any negligence on their part was passive and secondary. The defense also raised issues of spoliation of evidence and reserved the right to assert additional defenses. They demanded a jury trial and asked the court to dismiss the action. They also asked for judgment in their favor, award of costs, and determination of their proportionate share of responsibility, if any.

Expert Testimony

Brad Avrit, a liability expert, is set to testify at trial about safety issues in Food 4 Less’ operations. He plans to cover four main points: the poor maintenance of the area where the plaintiff fell, the failure to meet industry standards in that area, the condition and analysis of the store’s security surveillance system, and the dangerously slippery coefficient of friction of the floor surface. His testimony aims to support the plaintiff’s case by emphasizing alleged safety deficiencies at Food 4 Less.

Jury Verdict

On July 23, 2024, the jury awarded Maria Gomez $2,437,388 in total damages. This includes $887,388 for past medical expenses, $400,000 for past non-economic damages (such as pain and suffering), $500,000 for future medical expenses, and $650,000 for future non-economic damages in Slip and Fall lawsuit.

Court Documents:

Available Upon Request