Summary judgment was properly entered for defendant store in this slip-and-fall suit.  Neither plaintiff nor the store manager who came to the scene saw anything on the floor on which the plaintiff slipped.  Plaintiff’s testimony that the store manager told her employees had slipped there before was excluded as hearsay, and that ruling was not challenged on appeal, so the evidence could not be considered on appeal.  Plaintiff’s expert’s testimony that the floor’s index of slip resistance was too low when we did not support plaintiff’s claim since there was no evidence the floor was wet.  Finally, even if there was a dispute about whether the store had inspected the floor shortly before plaintiff slipped, any failure to inspect often enough did not cause plaintiff’s fall since there was nothing on the floor that a more frequent inspection would have revealed.

California Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 1 (Johnson, J.); May 30, 2018 (published June 26, 2018); 2018 Cal. App. LEXIS 586