Hot dog leads to suit

December 4, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
A woman slipped in a Connersville Speedway gas station, so of course, she’s filed a lawsuit. The gas station should have known better than to leave a hot dog on the floor.

According to a lawsuit filed in Indianapolis this week in federal court, Mary Stenger believes Speedway “failed to warn of the dangerous condition created by the hot dog on the floor.” She visited the gas station in March with her husband and while walking in, slipped on the hot dog and fell.

The suit doesn’t say whether it was a jumbo frank or regular dog, or whether it was plain or had slippery condiments on it like mustard or relish. It also doesn’t say how old Mrs. Stenger is, so perhaps her fall did seriously injure her. Again, scant on details, but apparently she’s suffering from bodily disfigurement, and possible permanent physical and emotional injuries. Could her mental suffering be embarrassment because you have to tell people you slipped on a hot dog?

Businesses have a duty to protect their customers, thus things like the yellow “caution” signs are used when they mop the floor. If this had been a slick floor, I’d probably have more sympathy because it’s easy to not see water on the ground. But how can you miss spotting a hog dog on the ground, and when you step on it, how do you fall instead of just smooshing it? The suit doesn’t say that she was physically or visually impaired at the time of the accident.

Her husband is also a part of the suit because he’s lost the care, society, companionship, support, and service of his spouse.

And is it just me, or is it ironic that the firm representing Mrs. Stenger is Craig, Kelley & Faultless and her attorney is Scott Faultless? The suit says Speedway should have seen the hot dog and known someone would trip on it, and the gas station should have expected she wouldn’t realize there was a hot dog on the floor and wouldn’t protect herself against it.
ADVERTISEMENT
  • I know I am late on this comment, but I have to think you have not frequented some of the Speedway stations I have seen. Yes, it is possible for an able-bodied person to slip and be seriously injured. It is also possible that the hot dog was already smooshed leaving a large greasy area. Why assume that the defendant and attorney are exaggerating?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. The ADA acts as a tax upon all for the benefit of a few. And, most importantly, the many have no individual say in whether they pay the tax. Those with handicaps suffered in military service should get a pass, but those who are handicapped by accident or birth do NOT deserve that pass. The drivel about "equal access" is spurious because the handicapped HAVE equal access, they just can't effectively use it. That is their problem, not society's. The burden to remediate should be that of those who seek the benefit of some social, constructional, or dimensional change, NOT society generally. Everybody wants to socialize the costs and concentrate the benefits of government intrusion so that they benefit and largely avoid the costs. This simply maintains the constant push to the slop trough, and explains, in part, why the nation is 20 trillion dollars in the hole.

  2. Hey 2 psychs is never enough, since it is statistically unlikely that three will ever agree on anything! New study admits this pseudo science is about as scientifically valid as astrology ... done by via fortune cookie ....John Ioannidis, professor of health research and policy at Stanford University, said the study was impressive and that its results had been eagerly awaited by the scientific community. “Sadly, the picture it paints - a 64% failure rate even among papers published in the best journals in the field - is not very nice about the current status of psychological science in general, and for fields like social psychology it is just devastating,” he said. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/27/study-delivers-bleak-verdict-on-validity-of-psychology-experiment-results

  3. Indianapolis Bar Association President John Trimble and I are on the same page, but it is a very large page with plenty of room for others to join us. As my final Res Gestae article will express in more detail in a few days, the Great Recession hastened a fundamental and permanent sea change for the global legal service profession. Every state bar is facing the same existential questions that thrust the medical profession into national healthcare reform debates. The bench, bar, and law schools must comprehensively reconsider how we define the practice of law and what it means to access justice. If the three principals of the legal service profession do not recast the vision of their roles and responsibilities soon, the marketplace will dictate those roles and responsibilities without regard for the public interests that the legal profession professes to serve.

  4. I have met some highly placed bureaucrats who vehemently disagree, Mr. Smith. This is not your father's time in America. Some ideas are just too politically incorrect too allow spoken, says those who watch over us for the good of their concept of order.

  5. Lets talk about this without forgetting that Lawyers, too, have FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSOCIATION

ADVERTISEMENT