ÿWPC³ …# VUNa %¯ 0GµU:üw@6 4v Š B™ Û 0Jã 0T- 0^ 0hß 0rG 0|¹ 0†5 0» 1uK 0dÀ U>$U*bB)ŒDCµ AMø BEèbv~JvÓÈ D3› 0@Î AOÆ] 0D# D/g B–˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX('\$¡¡Ô€XåÙXXMXÔ,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular ¼D½D¾D¿DÀDÁDÂDÃÄÓ€ÐÍD0"lHô3|xÐC:\WPWIN60\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd€-#Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d ÞÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ ÔÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÔ€!ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€!XÔÌÌò òMay€15,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€!ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€æXXdìdÈ7Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌÌÌGEORGIA€KEYS,à àà àà àà à)€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óPlaintiff/Appellant,à àà àò ò)€€Shelby€Circuit€No.€60428€T.D.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)̜ـ€ÙßR€$&#A1-j|Š` Å `€€@ÿRß›VS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€Appeal€No.€02A01„9605„CV„00113Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌMEMPHIS€CARWASH,€INC.€d/b/aà à)ÌMR.€PRIDEððS€CARWASH,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àó óDefendant/Appellee.à àò ò)ó óÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€OF€SHELBY€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€MEMPHIS,€TENNESSEEÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€KAY€S.€ROBILIO,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌò òEUGENE€C.€GAERIGÌó óMemphis,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€AppellantÌÌÌò òLELAND€M.€McNABBÌSHUTTLEWORTH,€SMITH,€McNABB€&€WILLIAMSÌó óMemphis,€TennesseeÌAttorney€for€AppelleeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌó óà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àALAN€E.€HIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌW.€FRANK€CRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌHOLLY€KIRBY€LILLARD,€J.ÌœÓÓó óà àIn€this€slip€and€fall€case,€Georgia€Keys€(ð ðPlaintiffðð)€filed€suit€against€MemphisÏÑ7€XXdæXXdì7ÑCarwash,€Inc.,€d/b/a€Mr.€Prideððs€Car€Wash€(ð ðDefendantðð)€for€injuries€sustained€from€aÏfall€at€Defendantððs€place€of€business.€€The€trial€court€granted€judgment€in€favor€of€theÏDefendant€holding€that€Plaintiff€failed€to€establish€the€Defendantððs€negligence.€€PlaintiffÏappeals€the€judgment€of€the€court€below€arguing€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€holdingÏthat€the€Plaintiff€failed€to€prove€the€Defendantððs€negligence€and€in€making€an€oralÏruling€in€favor€of€the€Defendant€at€the€close€of€the€proof€before€first€making€its€findingsÏof€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.€€For€the€reasons€stated€hereafter,€we€affirm€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà@ àò òFACTSÌÌó óà àSometime€between€5:00€and€5:45€p.m.€on€December€18,€1993,€the€Plaintiff€andÏher€daughter€arrived€at€Defendantððs€place€of€business€for€a€car€wash.€€Attempting€toÏretrieve€her€car€after€it€had€been€washed,€Plaintiff€opened€the€car€door€and€thenÍslipped,€fell€and€slid€under€the€vehicle.€€ÌÌà àAfter€Plaintiffððs€fall,€the€Defendantððs€manager,€Mr.€White,€approached€the€PlaintiffÏinquiring€as€to€what€had€happened.€€Plaintiff€testified€that€Mr.€White€said,€ð ðMyÏemployees€know€they€shouldnððt€have€poured€that€substance.ðð€ÌÌà àPlaintiff€claims€to€have€slipped€on€a€dark,€slippery€substance€and€contends€thatÏshe€could€not€have€avoided€the€fall€due€to€the€fact€that€it€was€getting€dark€outside,€theÏlighting€at€Defendantððs€place€of€business€was€poor,€and€the€substance€and€the€asphaltÏthat€she€fell€upon€was€dark.€€Ìà àÌà àAt€trial,€Plaintiff€testified€that€she€could€not€identify€the€substance€that€sheÏslipped€upon€and€that€she€could€not€show€how€it€had€gotten€there,€the€duration€that€itÏhad€been€there€or€who€had€put€it€there.€ÌÌà@ àò òLAWó óÌÌà àThe€two€issues€before€this€Court€are€as€follows:Ìà à1)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€holding€that€the€Plaintiff€failed€to€prove€theÏDefendantððs€negligence;€andÌà à2)€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€rendering€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusionsÏof€law.ÌÌà àAlthough€an€owner€or€operator€of€a€place€of€business€is€not€an€insurer€of€theÏsafety€of€the€premises,€an€owner€or€operator€must€exercise€ordinary€care€to€maintainÏthe€premises€in€a€reasonably€safe€condition.€€òòMartin€v.€Washmaster€Auto€Center,ÏU.S.A.óó,€No.€01„A„01„9605„CV„00242,€1996€LEXIS€799,€at€*10€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Dec.€11,Ï1996);€òòSmith€v.€Inman€Realty€Co.óó,€846€S.W.2d€819,€822€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1992);€òòJonesÏv.€Zayre,€Inc.óó,€600€S.W.2d€730,€732€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1980);€òòPatterson€v.€Kroger€Co.óó,€389ÏS.W.2d€283€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1965).€€The€duty€of€care€owed€by€a€premises€owner€to€anÏinvitee€is€a€duty€of€reasonable€care€under€all€the€circumstances.€€òòMcCall€v.€Wilderóó,€913ÏS.W.2d€150,€153€(Tenn.€1995);€òòEaton€v.€McLainóó,€891€S.W.2d€587,€593€(Tenn.€1994).€ÏThis€duty€includes€the€responsibility€of€either€removing€or€warning€against€any€latent,Ïdangerous€condition€on€the€premises€of€which€the€owner€is€aware€or€should€haveÏbeen€aware€through€the€exercise€of€reasonable€diligence.€€òòEatonóó,€€891€S.W.2d€at€593„94;€òòDawson€v.€Sears,€Roebuck€&€Co.óó,€394€S.W.2d€877€(Tenn.€1965);€òòChambliss€v.ÏShoneyððs,€Inc.óó,€742€S.W.2d€271€(Tenn.€App.€1987);€òòTeal€v.€E.I.€DuPont€de€NemoursÏand€Co.óó,€728€F.2d€799€(6th€Cir.€1984).€€ÌÌà àIn€order€to€prevail€in€a€premises€liability€action,€a€plaintiff€must€show€that€theÏdangerous€or€defective€condition€(1)€was€caused€or€created€by€the€owner,€operator€orÏhis€agent;€or,€(2)€if€the€condition€was€created€by€someone€other€than€the€owner,Ïoperator€or€his€agent,€there€must€be€actual€or€constructive€notice€on€the€part€of€theÏowner€or€operator€that€the€condition€existed€prior€to€the€accident.€€òòMartinóó,€1996€LEXISÏ799,€at€*10;€òòOgle€v.€Winn„Dixie€Greenville,€Inc.óó,€919€S.W.2d€45,€47€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ï1995);€òòKeene€v.€Cracker€Barrel€Old€Country€Storeóó,€853€S.W.2d€501,€503€(Tenn.€Ct.ÍApp.€1992);€òòChambliss€v.€Shoneyððs,€Inc.óó,€742€S.W.2d€271€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1987);ÏòòJonesóó,€600€S.W.2d€at€732.€€à àÌà àIf€liability€is€predicated€upon€the€constructive€knowledge€of€the€defendant,€aÏplaintiff€can€demonstrate€constructive€knowledge€by€showing€that€the€dangerous€orÏdefective€condition€existed€for€such€length€of€time€that€the€defendant€knew,€or€in€theÏexercise€of€ordinary€care€should€have€known,€of€its€existence.€€òòSimmons€v.€Sears,ÏRoebuck€and€Co.óó,€713€S.W.2d€640,€641€(Tenn.€1986);€€€òòMartinóó,€1996€LEXIS€799,€atÏ*10;€òòJonesóó,€600€S.W.2d€at€732.€€Conversely,€a€plaintiff€can€also€prove€constructiveÏknowledge€by€showing€that€the€defendantððs€method€of€operation€created€a€hazardousÏsituation€foreseeably€harmful€to€others.€€òòMartinóó,€1996€LEXIS€799,€at€*11.ÌÌà àIn€òòChambliss€v.€Shoneyððs,€Inc.óó,€742€S.W.2d€271€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1987),€theÏplaintiff€slipped€and€fell€in€a€puddle€of€water€in€the€defendant€restaurantððs€bathroom.€ÏHaving€no€proof€as€to€the€origin€of€the€water,€the€plaintiff€theorized€that€the€water€wasÏtracked€in€from€the€snow€and€slush€outside€the€restaurant.€€òòIdóó.€at€273.€€Although€theÏproof€revealed€that€there€were€no€mats€in€place€for€the€defendantððs€customers€to€cleanÏtheir€feet€and€that€it€could€have€been€as€long€as€forty„five€minutes€since€an€employeeÏof€the€defendant€made€a€periodic€inspection€of€the€bathroom€floor,€the€trial€courtÏdirected€a€verdict€in€favor€of€the€defendant.€€òòIdóó.€at€272.€€In€affirming€the€trial€courtððsÏdecision,€this€Court€held€that€the€lack€of€proof€as€to€when€and€how€the€pool€of€waterÏreached€the€bathroom€floor€precluded€the€plaintiff€from€recovering€against€theÏdefendant.€€€òòIdóó.€at€274.ÌÌà àSimilarly,€in€òòDurham€v.€Webbóó,€No.€02A01„9502„CV„00033,€1996€WL€298250Ï(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€June€3,€1996),€the€plaintiff€allegedly€slipped€and€fell€on€an€oil€spot€inÏthe€parking€lot€at€defendantððs€gas€station.€€Although€the€plaintiff€testified€that€she€sawÏoil€in€the€same€spot€where€she€fell€one€week€after€the€accident€and€although€aÏfrequent€customer€of€the€defendant€gas€station€stated€that€she€had€observed€oil€spotsÏin€the€parking€lot€on€prior€occasions,€this€Court€affirmed€the€trial€courtððs€grant€ofÏsummary€judgment€in€favor€of€the€defendant,€holding€that€the€plaintiff€failed€to€proveÏthat€the€defendant€created€the€dangerous€condition€or€that€the€defendant€knew€orÏshould€have€known€of€such€condition.€€€òòIdóó.€at€*4.€ÌÌà àMoreover,€in€òòMartin€v.€Washmaster€Auto€Center,€U.S.A.óó,€No.€01„A„01„9605„CV„00242,€1996€LEXIS€799,€at€*8€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Dec.€11,€1996),€a€case€strikingly€similarÏto€the€case€at€bar,€the€plaintiff€slipped€and€fell€on€the€asphalt€at€the€defendant€carwashÏwhile€attempting€to€retrieve€her€car€after€it€had€been€washed.€€Offering€no€proof€as€toÏthe€identity€of€the€substance€that€caused€her€fall,€Plaintiff€testified€that€the€substanceÏshe€slipped€upon€was€not€visible€and€was€ð ðsomething€slippery€other€than€justÏrainwater€or€ice€water.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€*8.€€Plaintiff€stated€that€she€ð ðdidnððt€knowðð€whether€whatÏshe€had€slipped€on€was€something€dropped€by€a€customer€or€was€something€that€hadÏoriginated€by€an€agent€of€the€defendant.€€€òòIdóó.€€€In€failing€to€show€that€the€defendantÏcreated€a€hazardous€condition€or€that€the€defendant€had€actual€or€constructiveÏknowledge€of€the€dangerous€condition€and€in€failing€to€introduce€proof€indicating€thatÏslip€and€fall€accidents€at€the€carwash€were€a€common€or€recurring€incident,€this€CourtÏset€aside€the€jury€verdict€and€granted€a€judgment€in€favor€of€the€defendant.€€òòIdóó.€at€*22.ÌÌà àIn€the€instant€case,€Plaintiff€theorizes€that€the€Defendant,€through€its€agents,Ïservants€or€employees,€created€the€condition€which€caused€her€injury€and€that,Ïtherefore,€the€Defendant€is€liable€for€the€acts€of€its€agents,€servants€or€employees€andÏfor€the€resultant€injury€caused€by€these€acts.ÌÌà àPlaintiff€testified€that€she€could€not€identify€the€substance€that€she€slipped€uponÏand€that€she€did€not€know€how€the€substance€had€gotten€there,€the€duration€that€it€hadÏbeen€there€or€who€had€put€it€there.€€Plaintiff€bases€her€entire€case€upon€theÏDefendantððs€managerððs€statement€made€shortly€after€Plaintiffððs€fall€whereinÏDefendantððs€manager€stated,€ð ðMy€employees€know€they€shouldnððt€have€poured€thatÏsubstance.ðð€€ÌÌà àAlthough€a€plaintiff€is€not€required€to€prove€the€specific€slippery€substance€thatÏcaused€her€fall,€a€plaintiff€must€show€that€the€defendant€caused€the€substance€uponÏwhich€she€slipped€to€be€on€the€ground€or€that€the€defendant€knew€or€should€haveÏknown€that€the€slippery€substance€was€present.€€òòMartinóó,€1996€LEXIS€799,€*11.€€In€thisÏcase€the€statement€by€Defendantððs€manager€was€susceptible€to€more€than€oneÏinterpretation.€This€statement€does€not€show€conclusively€that€the€Defendant€or€hisÏagents€created€the€dangerous€condition€which€caused€Plaintiffððs€fall€or€that€theÏDefendant€or€his€agents€had€knowledge€of€this€condition.€€ÌÌà àBecause€Plaintiff€did€not€prove€that€the€Defendant,€through€its€agents,€servantsÍor€employees,€created€the€dangerous€or€defective€condition,€that€the€Defendant€or€anyÏof€its€agents€had€actual€or€constructive€knowledge€of€such€a€condition,€or€that€slip€andÏfall€accidents€at€the€Defendantððs€place€of€business€were€a€common€or€recurringÏincident,€the€trial€court€did€not€err€in€holding€that€Plaintiff€failed€to€establish€theÏDefendantððs€negligence.ÌÌà àBecause€of€our€disposition€of€the€foregoing€issue,€we€need€not€address€theÏremaining€issue.Ìà àÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€hereby€affirmed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€toÏAppellant€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àòòà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïóóà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHIGHERS,€J.ÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌCRAWFORD,€P.J.,€W.S.ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌLILLARD,€J.