Home – Slip and Fall – Winn Dixie Cases Won
Winn Dixie Settlements and Cases Won
Sample Winn Dixie Slip and Fall Settlements:
Below is a sample of some of the slip and fall cases Alan Sackrin has settled and won against Winn Dixie by filing a lawsuit or by pre-lawsuit settlement.
- Settlement: $40,000.00 – G. E. D. v. WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC., et. al. – Slipped & fell on water on floor, injured neck & back
- Settlement Amount: $40,000.00 – C.S. v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. – While grocery shopping client was hit with a dolly from behind that is used to restock shelves.
- Settlement: $25,000.00 – M. M. v. WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC.- Slipped & fell on clear liquid on floor while pushing cart, injured lower back, R knee, neck, L shoulder (some injuries may have been preexisting). Plaintiff alleged Winn-Dixie’s failure to keep premises reasonably free from items/substances on floor, failure to warn of dangerous conditions, and negligently maintained equipment.
- Settlement: $20,000.00 – D. B. v. Winn-Dixie Stores #203 – slip and fall in the produce department on a grape
- Settlement: $12,500.00 – M.D. v. Winn-Dixie Logistics, Inc.
- Settlement: $10,500.00 – D.S. – Winn-Dixie Stores – While grocery shopping, client slipped on an oily substance.
See More of Alan Sackrin’s Verdicts and Settlements
Quick Winn Dixie Facts:
According to the Clerk of the Court’s website, the number of negligence cases filed against Winn-Dixie per year in Broward County, Florida, with almost all of the lawsuits being premises liability cases, is:
- 2019 – 15
- 2018 – 18
- 2017 – 28
- 2016 – 31
- 2015 – 39
- 2014 – 47
- 2013 – 40
- 2012 – 48
- 2011 – 52
Florida Winn Dixie Case Law
Below are appellate cases involving Winn Dixie and slip and falls in their grocery stores. We believe analyzing these cases gives us a view into how Winn Dixie approaches slip and fall cases.
Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Marcotte
Customer sued after a slip and fall on a slippery substance on floor. Plaintiff produced no evidence that the store, its agents, or employees caused the substance to be on the floor or had knowledge of its existence prior to the accident. Nor did the customer produce evidence regarding how or when the substance got on the floor or how long it had been there. Verdict was in favor of customer. Reversed upon appeal based on – there was no evidence that store had actual knowledge of the dangerous condition nor evidence as to how long the dangerous condition existed prior to the injury.
CATEGORY: negligence, premises liability
Bates v. Winn-Dixie Supermarkets, Inc.
Customer slipped and fell on a banana peel while pushing his cart and shopping. He alleged that the peel, which he claimed was old and black, had been on the floor long enough for store’s employees to have known about it or to have discovered it and that they were negligent in not correcting the dangerous condition. Winn-Dixie moved for summary judgment after filing its Answer and defenses and taking depositions. Their Motion for Summary Judgment was granted by the trial court since Plaintiff failed to show how long the peel had been on the floor. Upon appeal the trial court’s entry of the final Summary Judgment was affirmed because of failure to show evidence of how long the peel had been on the floor or that it was there through negligence of store employees or any act of an outsider.
CATEGORY: constructive knowledge, negligence
Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Manning
Woman slipped and fell on a grape while shopping in store. Plaintiff’s theory of negligence was that the store was negligent in its operational procedure in the display and sale of grapes. Defendant denied this and alleged that Plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence causing her own injury. Verdict was entered for Plaintiff. Reversed on appeal: no testimony of how grapes came to be on the floor, how long they were there, or who had placed them there. To conclude that the presence of grapes on the floor was a result of operational negligence thru store employees that created the hazard would necessitate conjecture.
Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Benton
A customer slipped and fell in a puddle of milk in the store. Verdict was in customer’s favor. The store appealed and verdict was affirmed. It was plaintiff’s burden to prove that the milk was on the floor sufficiently long to charge Winn-Dixie with notice. Notice may be proved by circumstantial evidence. It has frequently been recognized that the condition of the floor, the nature of the substance on the floor, and the surrounding circumstances, may be sufficient to support an inference by the jury that a dangerous condition existed long enough for the store employees to know, or that they should have known, of the condition.
CATEGORY: constructive notice
Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Burse
Plaintiff slipped, fell, and was injured due to a plastic container top, from a six pack of beer, which was on the floor. Plaintiff received a monetary award despite the store’s objection that the evidence was insufficient for jury to impute constructive knowledge of the hazard to the store owner. Winn-Dixie appealed and trials court’s verdict was affirmed. The record reveals that it was commonplace for persons to come into the store and purchase individual cans of beer which they broke out of six packs, which often resulted in the accumulation of excess plastic container tops on the beer shelf. It was also shown that there was no suitable container furnished in the vicinity where trash might be disposed of. Although the manager of the store testified that he was responsible for keeping the premises clean, he had not inspected the area nor where the plaintiff fell for an hour and a half before the accident. Further, an examination of the packaging container which the plaintiff slipped upon revealed that it was filthy and scuffed up. Under these circumstances, it is foreseeable that container tops might end up on the floor, and in the instant case the evidence leads to the reasonable inference that the container that was the cause of the plaintiff’s injury had been on the floor for a sufficient period of time so as to constitute notice.
CATEGORY: constructive knowledge
Gordon v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. July 29, 1998 713 So.2d 1121 1998 WL 422538
Summary Judgment was awarded to Winn Dixie by the trial court. Upon appeal, verdict was reversed and remanded for further proceedings re: whether Winn Dixie had constructive notice of the object upon which Gordon had fallen.
CATEGORY: constuctive notice
Trapani v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. July 30, 2008 989 So.2d 670 2008 WL 2906634
Vincenzo slipped, fell, and was injured while at Winn Dixie. The Trapani’s claim was for his personal injuries as well as his wife’s consortium claim. Final Summary Judgment was awarded to Winn Dixie by the trial court, and was reversed upon appeal. Winn Dixie failed to file any affidavits or depositions in support of its Motion for Summary Judgment.
CATEGORY: GENUINE ISSUES OF MATERIAL FACT
Cooper v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. October 12, 1983 438 So.2d 1012
Trial court granted a directed verdict to Winn Dixie for Plaintiff’s clip and fall in store on an unknown substance. Upon appeal, Cooper alleged that facts cited as evidence during trial should have been sufficient enough to establish constructive notice to store of condition of color. The appellate court found Cooper did not establish the necessary constructive notice.
CATEGORY: CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE
Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. v. White
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. June 26, 1996 675 So.2d 702 1996 WL 346984
TORTS – Slip and Fall. Circumstantial evidence was insufficient to establish dangerous condition in store or store’s knowledge of condition.
Trial court found in favor of Plaintiff White and denied Winn Dixie’s Motion for Directed Verdict after she slipped and fell in Winn Dixie and was injured. White fell on an area of the floor in the store near where the floor was being buffed with a machine. White did not find the floor wet nor did she find any other reason for her fall. A witness noticed same. The appellate court found the trial court erred in denying Winn Dixie’s Motion for Directed Verdict. The case was reversed and remanded directing the trial court to enter a verdict in favor of Winn Dixie.
CATEGORY: CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE
Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Gaines
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. April 26, 1989 542 So.2d 432 1989 WL 39565
Verdict was awarded to Gaines by trial court for a slip and fall in Winn Dixie which occurred near an area where dried rice and beans were found on the floor. There was no testimony re: how the rice and beans got on the floor or how long they had been there. On appeal, the trial court’s verdict was reversed and case was remanded for entry of a directed verdict for Winn Dixie
CATEGORY: CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE
Quick Slip And Fall Facts:
Slip and falls are the second leading cause of injuries and deaths after car accidents. Every hour an older adult dies as a result of a fall. The most common injuries resulting from slip and falls include, herniated disc, head injury and/or a knee injury. Learn more from Alan Sackrin, an expert slip and fall lawyer.
Related Slip and Fall Topics
Please feel free to read our other slip and fall (trip and fall) related articles and fact sheets, including:
- 6 Environmental factors that can cause slip and fall accidents
- 4 Factors that determine the types of injuries from a slip and fall
- Slip and Falls in Hotels and Motels
- Slippery Conditions in Restaurants
- Condominium and HOA Slip and Fall Injuries
- Nursing Home Slip and Fall
- Slip and Fall Case Checklist
- Sample Slip and Fall Lawsuit
Do You Have a Question?
Please fill out the “Talk With An Attorney” form above to ask a question or you can call Alan Sackrin at 954-458-8655. He promises to get back to you promptly. Ask now.
Learn More: See Our Slip and Fall Resource Page