Perez v. Hibachi Buffet (Aug. 30, 2022, B304824) __ Cal.App.5th __ [2022 WL 3724764]
Plaintiff sued a restaurant after slipping and falling on wet tile. The parties agreed there was liquid on the floor where plaintiff slipped but did not agree how the liquid got there. Plaintiff alleged the liquid was from a restaurant worker transporting dirty dishes on a cart. The restaurant admitted that its employees used the hallway to transport dishware but discounted plaintiff’s theory with testimony that employees used a different hallway to transport dish carts and had never seen liquid leak from the carts. The jury awarded $850,000 in damages. The trial court granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a new trial on grounds that the inference the restaurant employees spilled the liquid was impermissibly speculative. Plaintiff appealed.
The Court of Appeal reversed. The court concluded that given the size and pattern of the liquid spill and the restaurant’s admission that its staff used the hallway to transport dishes, the inference that a restaurant employee spilled the liquid while taking dirty dishes from the dining area to the kitchen was permissible because it was “logical” and “made sense.” The court found the restaurant’s explanation—that the spill could have been caused by a customer with a drink or someone rushing to the restroom—“made little sense,” and the more “reasonable explanation wins.”
