{
  "id": 796071,
  "name": "CAROLYN DALE TREXLER v. K-MART CORPORATION",
  "name_abbreviation": "Trexler v. K-Mart Corp.",
  "decision_date": "1996-02-09",
  "docket_number": "No. 323PA95",
  "first_page": "637",
  "last_page": "638",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "342 N.C. 637"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "458 S.E.2d 720",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1995,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "119 N.C. App. 406",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        11915527
      ],
      "year": 1995,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/119/0406-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "26 ALR4th 481",
      "category": "reporters:specialty",
      "reporter": "A.L.R. 4th",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "20 ALR4th 438",
      "category": "reporters:specialty",
      "reporter": "A.L.R. 4th",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "85 ALR3d 1000",
      "category": "reporters:specialty",
      "reporter": "A.L.R. 3d",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "414 S.E.2d 339",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "331 N.C. 57",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2500046
      ],
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/331/0057-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "414 S.E.2d 339",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "331 N.C. 57",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        2500046
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/331/0057-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 190,
    "char_count": 2137,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.681,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.02861305813582182
    },
    "sha256": "6d8dcf02aff9e6b73272873e6c18a9c5257ef9973b0313488ec16d37f30c2943",
    "simhash": "1:79f926222547c5c9",
    "word_count": 337
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:36:26.105751+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "CAROLYN DALE TREXLER v. K-MART CORPORATION"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nBased upon the authority of Roumillat v. Simplistic Enters., 331 N.C. 57, 414 S.E.2d 339 (1992), the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed. The case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further remand to the Superior Court, Rowan County, for reinstatement of the trial court\u2019s order allowing summary judgment for defendant.\nREVERSED AND REMANDED.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Wallace and Whitley, P.A., by Michael S. Adkins, for plaintiff - appellee.",
      "Hedrick, Eatman, Gardner & Kincheloe, by Scott M. Stevenson and Allen C. Smith, for defendant-appellant.",
      "Davis, Murrelle & Lumsden, P.A., by Janet M. Lyles, on behalf of North Carolina Academy of Trial Lawyers, amicus curiae."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "CAROLYN DALE TREXLER v. K-MART CORPORATION\nNo. 323PA95\n(Filed 9 February 1996)\nNegligence \u00a7 140 (NCI4th)\u2014 slip and fall \u2014 invitee\u2014summary judgment motion \u2014 inspection of premises \u2014 burden of coming forward with evidence\nThe Court of Appeals decision that in slip and fall cases involving injury to an invitee in which defendant moves for summary judgment, it is appropriate to place upon defendant the initial burden of gathering information about whether, when, and by whom the premises were last inspected prior to plaintiff\u2019s injury is reversed based upon the authority of Roumillat v. Simplistic Enterprises, Inc., 331 N.C. 57, 414 S.E.2d 339.\nAm Jur 2d, Premises Liability \u00a7 29.\nStore or business premises slip-and-fall: Modern status of rules requiring showing of notice of proprietor of transitory interior condition allegedly causing plaintiff\u2019s fall. 85 ALR3d 1000.\nLiability of owner of store, office, or similar place of business to invitee falling on tracked-in water or snow. 20 ALR4th 438.\nLiability of operator of store, office, or similar place of business to invitee slipping on spilled liquid or semiliquid substance. 26 ALR4th 481.\nOn discretionary review pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 7A-31(a) of a decision of the Court of Appeals, 119 N.C. App. 406, 458 S.E.2d 720 (1995), reversing an order allowing summary judgment for defendant, entered on 16 November 1993 by Webb, J., in Superior Court, Rowan County. Heard in the Supreme Court 14 December 1995.\nWallace and Whitley, P.A., by Michael S. Adkins, for plaintiff - appellee.\nHedrick, Eatman, Gardner & Kincheloe, by Scott M. Stevenson and Allen C. Smith, for defendant-appellant.\nDavis, Murrelle & Lumsden, P.A., by Janet M. Lyles, on behalf of North Carolina Academy of Trial Lawyers, amicus curiae."
  },
  "file_name": "0637-01",
  "first_page_order": 669,
  "last_page_order": 670
}