holding plaintiff’s factual allegations that mall security personnel were aw are assailants had disturbed other mall patrons before attacking plaintiff, and possibly witnessed the attack, prevented dismissal of negligence claim against mall owner
How later courts described this case
- holding plaintiff’s factual allegations that mall security personnel were aw are assailants had disturbed other mall patrons before attacking plaintiff, and possibly witnessed the attack, prevented dismissal of negligence claim against mall owner
- reversing dismissal of petition that included claims of negligent training
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
GARRETT, Vice Chief Judge,
concurring:
I concur. The trial court, in my view, erroneously sustained a motion to dismiss. Whether Appellant’s case will withstand a proper motion for summary judgment, after discovery, is not before this Court to decide.
JONES, Judge
concurring specially:
I read the petition’s averment “that the guards stood by” to be sufficient to allege the guards saw the assault in progress and did nothing which is a sufficient allegation to survive a motion to dismiss. I am authorized to state that GARRETT, V.C.J. concurs in this view.