# Robinson v. Kroger Co.

> Supreme Court of Georgia · December 3, 1997 · 268 Ga. 735

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9853979

## Case

- **Full name:** Robinson v. Kroger Company
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Georgia
- **Decided:** December 3, 1997
- **Citations:** 268 Ga. 735; 97 Fulton County D. Rep. 4314; 493 S.E.2d 403; 1997 Ga. LEXIS 752
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Hunstein
- **Judges:** Benham, Hunstein, Fletcher
- **Cited by:** 478 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9853979

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that, to prevail on a slip-and- fall claim in Georgia, a plaintiff must prove, among other things, “(1) that the defendant had actual or constructive knowledge of the hazard; and (2) that the plaintiff lacked knowledge of the hazard despite the exercise of ordinary car…
- holding that “an invitee’s failure to exercise ordinary care is not established as a matter of law by the invitee’s admission that he did not look at the site on which he placed his foot or that he could have seen the hazard had he visually examined the floor before taking the…
- explaining that the distraction doctrine applies to conduct or displays that are “of such a nature that the defendant might have anticipated that it would divert an invitee’s attention”
- recognizing that summary judgment may be appropriate where the plaintiff could not establish the defendant’s actual or constructive knowledge of the hazard

## Opinion text

Hunstein, Justice,
concurring.
While I fully join the majority’s opinion, I would prefer to resolve slip and fall cases on the basis of pure comparative negligence. However, I recognize that resolution would require legislative change, which I urge the General Assembly to consider.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9853979. Public record. Not legal advice.