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. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT