This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 04/10/2020 at 02:01:10 (UTC).

NORMA KADDO VS COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORORATION ET AL

Case Summary

On 09/15/2017 NORMA KADDO filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORORATION. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are GEORGINA T. RIZK, KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE and MARK A. BORENSTEIN. The case status is Other.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****4668

  • Filing Date:

    09/15/2017

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

GEORGINA T. RIZK

KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE

MARK A. BORENSTEIN

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

KADDO NORMA

Defendants and Respondents

DOES 1 TO 30

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION

CLUB DEMONSTRATION SERVICES INC.

CLUB DEMONSTRATION SERVICES INC. [DOE 1]

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

MARKARIAN CHRISTOPHER V. ESQ.

MESAROS CHRISTOPHER P.

MESAROS CHRISTOPHER PAUL

MESAROS CHRISTOPHE PAUL ESQ.

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

HARBER STEPHEN M. ESQ

ALLARIA MARC V.

ALLARIA MARC VICTOR ESQ.

 

Court Documents

Notice of Ruling

2/28/2020: Notice of Ruling

Notice of Settlement

2/20/2020: Notice of Settlement

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW RE: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT)

2/20/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW RE: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT)

Declaration - DECLARATION OF ASHTON COHEN

11/27/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF ASHTON COHEN

Separate Statement

11/27/2019: Separate Statement

Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

12/27/2019: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

12/27/2019: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Substitution of Attorney

7/29/2019: Substitution of Attorney

Notice of Ruling

3/6/2019: Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - Minute Order (Final Status Conference)

3/1/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Final Status Conference)

Proof of Personal Service

2/25/2019: Proof of Personal Service

Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

1/31/2019: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

1/31/2019: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION?S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF?S COMPLAINT

2/2/2018: COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION?S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF?S COMPLAINT

Substitution of Attorney -

6/21/2018: Substitution of Attorney -

CoverSheet -

9/15/2017: CoverSheet -

Summons -

9/15/2017: Summons -

Complaint -

9/15/2017: Complaint -

13 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 04/09/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Norma Kaddo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 29, Kristin S. Escalante, Presiding; Non-Jury Trial (of 5 to 7 days) - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/05/2020
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 29, Kristin S. Escalante, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/28/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Norma Kaddo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/20/2020
  • Docketat 10:30 AM in Department 29, Kristin S. Escalante, Presiding; Non-Appearance Case Review

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/20/2020
  • DocketNotice of Settlement; Filed by Norma Kaddo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/20/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Non-Appearance Case Review Re: Notice of Settlement) of 02/20/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/20/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Non-Appearance Case Review Re: Notice of Settlement)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 29, Kristin S. Escalante, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment (Or I The Alternative, Summary Adjudication, Filed by the Defendants) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment Or In The Alternative,...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
17 More Docket Entries
  • 01/31/2019
  • DocketNotice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by Norma Kaddo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/21/2018
  • DocketSubstitution of Attorney

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/21/2018
  • DocketSubstitution of Attorney; Filed by Norma Kaddo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/02/2018
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Costco Wholesale Corporation (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/02/2018
  • DocketCOSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF S COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/01/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/01/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Norma Kaddo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2017
  • DocketSummons; Filed by Norma Kaddo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2017
  • DocketComplaint

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC674668    Hearing Date: February 13, 2020    Dept: 29

Kaddo v. Costco, et al.

Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative Summary Adjudication filed by Defendants Costco Wholesale Corporation and Club Demonstration Services, Inc. (Doe 1) is GRANTED.

In the complaint, Plaintiff Norma Kaddo alleges that she slipped and fell on spilled food at a Costco store in San Dimas, CA. Plaintiff alleges two causes of action against Defendants Costco Wholesale Corporation (“Costco”) and Club Demonstration Services, Inc. (“CDS”) (collectively, “Defendants”), general negligence and premises liability. Defendants move for summary judgment, contending that the undisputed evidence establishes that Defendants exercised reasonable care and that Plaintiff does not have and cannot reasonably obtain evidence sufficient to establish one or more elements of her claim. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.

A store owner can be held liable for injuries to a business invitee from a dangerous condition on its premises only when the owner had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition. Ortega v. Kmart Corp. (2001) 26 Cal. 4th 1200, 1203. To prove constructive knowledge, a plaintiff must prove that the condition existed for a sufficient time to be discovered by ordinary care and inspection. Id. at 1207. A defendant acts with due care by conducting reasonably frequent inspections.

The Court concludes that Defendants met their initial burden as the moving party to show that it did not have actual or constructive knowledge of the condition that Plaintiff allegedly slipped on. Costco presented evidence that Costco employees perform continuous monitoring throughout every business day. (UMF No. 10.) Costco employees are trained and instructed to constantly monitor the store and to be vigilant so as to identify any dangerous conditions or hazards that may arise. Upon encountering any dangerous conditions, such as spilled liquids or solids on the store’s floors, Costco employees are trained to immediately remedy the dangerous condition, and if they are unable to do so, will notify another Costco employee to promptly resolve and remove any hazards. (UMF No. 10).

In addition, a designated Costco employee inspects the entire premises at the beginning of every hour of operation, each business day. (UMF No. 11.) Almost immediately after an inspection is completed, a new inspection will begin, and inspections alternate between "short-walk" and "long walk" inspections. (UMF Nos. 11-12.) Both types of inspections require a Costco employee to walk through every aisle of the store, to inspect for any dangerous conditions that may arise - such as liquids, food, or other debris that are spilled on the warehouse floor. (UMF No. 12.) During these inspections, a Costco employee walks through all aisles, pushing a cart that contains a wet floor sign, dust pan, and broom, and is instructed to immediately pick up any spilled items on the floor, clean the floor if necessary, and notate, in the action log of the "Daily Floor-walk / Safety Inspection" worksheet, and hazards or dangerous conditions that he or she encountered (such as spilled liquids or solids on the store's floor). (UMF No. 13.)

On the day of the alleged incident, Costco performed nine inspections of its entire store. (UMF No. 16.) Costco employee Anthony Gonzales was in the process of completing a second consecutive inspection of the entire store at the time Plaintiff alleged to have fallen. (See Declaration of Anthony Gonzales, attached as Exhibit H, to the Declaration of Ashton S. Cohen, Esq. 9; See also Costco Daily Floor-walk / Safety Inspection sheet, attached as Exhibit I, to the Declaration of Ashton S. Cohen, Esq. ¶ 10.) Inspections from the subject date did not reveal the dangerous condition that Plaintiff alleged. (UMF No. 16.) The employee who was operating the demo station (located near Plaintiff's alleged fall) also did not witness any substance on the floor or the presence of a dangerous condition. (UMF No. 17.) This evidence is sufficient to satisfy Costco’s initial burden to make a prima facie showing that it lacked actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition.

The burden thus shifted to Plaintiff to present evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact on the issue of actual or constructive knowledge. Plaintiff did not file an opposition, and thus failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Summary judgment is thus entered in favor of Costco and against Plaintiff.

As to CDS, there is no basis for a premises liability claim against CDS since CDS does not own the premises. Instead, CDS specializes in performing product demonstration services at designated “demo” stations in Costco stores. In addition to Costco’s oversight of the entire store, CDS acts as an extra lawyer of oversight to identify and immediately remedy hazardous conditions such as spilled liquid or food on the floor. CDS employees are trained to consistently check around the demo area and a 12-foot radius around the demo station to ensure it is clear of debris and spills. The CDS employee who was monitoring the demo station near Plaintiff’s alleged accident complied with the policy to continuously monitor the area surrounding her station and did not see any spilled substances on the floor. Had she seen such a condition, she would have immediately cleaned up the affected floor area. This evidence is sufficient to meet CDS’s initial burden of establishing that it was not negligent in connection with the alleged fall at issue here, thereby shifting the burden to Plaintiff to raise a triable issue. Plaintiff has presented no controverting evidence, and thus CDS is also entitled to summary judgment in its favor.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.