In a resounding victory for a retail giant, Hamilton, Miller & Birthisel, LLP (HM&B) successfully defended a summary judgment win on appeal. On September 19, 2025, the Second District Court of Appeal issued a per curiam affirmance, upholding the trial court’s ruling that the store had no constructive notice of the alleged hazardous condition, effectively ending the plaintiff’s premises liability claim. The case stemmed from an incident in a store’s produce aisle, where the plaintiff claimed she slipped on squished grapes and liquid, suffering injuries. Under Florida law, plaintiffs must prove a business had actual or constructive knowledge of a transitory substance—requiring evidence of its duration on the floor. HM&B argued that the plaintiff’s evidence, including deposition testimony, post-incident photographs, and a cell-phone video recorded after the fall, failed to create a genuine issue of material fact. At oral argument, HM&B emphasized the objective evidence—fresh photos showing no “plus” factors like tracks, drying, or dirt—rendering the plaintiff’s claims speculative. This win highlights HM&B’s expertise in premises liability, delivering cost-effective resolutions for clients facing slip-and-fall litigation. For major national retailers, it reinforces proactive risk management and robust legal representation can swiftly defeat unsubstantiated claims. Suzette L. Russomanno, Michael J. Dono, and Lara W. Rezapour were the attorneys from HM&B that secured the favorable result.
