This accident occurred while Plaintiff was shopping at Defendant’s supermarket for produce. Plaintiff was walking towards the store rack where bananas are shelved, when
he tripped and fell over a box that had been left on the floor. The box had been left on the corner of the aisle extending out into the walkway leading to the racks.

At the time of the incident, Plaintiff was looking at Defendant’s merchandise when without any warning he tripped and fell onto the ground landing on his right side sustaining
a bruise to his hip. The warehouse manager was notified of the accident. Not only was Plaintiff in a state of shock but since Plaintiff was unable to move, he remained on the floor
for about fifteen (15) minutes to see if he could stand up on his own. Plaintiff was unable to stand up on his own and the paramedics were called by the Defendant to render
emergency care to Plaintiff.

Plaintiff was taken to UCLA hospital for emergency care and he was diagnosed to have a fractured femur bone. Plaintiff was operated on twice on different dates and
hospitalized. After being discharged from the hospital, Plaintiff sought rehabilitation therapy which did not assist in recovery of his injuries.

Plaintiff contended that storekeepers are under duty to use ordinary care to keep the floors of their premises reasonably safe for the business invitees who must pass over
them. Tuttle v. Crawford, 8 Cal.2d 126, 130.

Although obviousness of a danger may relieve property owner of duty to warn of its existence, it will not necessarily relieve him of duty to remedy danger if property owner can
foresee that, despite its obviousness, danger may cause injury, as when necessity requires persons to encounter it. Osborn v. Missions Ready Mix, 224 Cal. App.3d 104.

Moreover, when an unsafe condition in premises causes injury to business invitee, and has been created by owner of property or by employee within scope of his
employment, knowledge of dangerous condition is imputed to owner and invitee need not prove owner's notice or knowledge of it. Sanders v. MacFarlanes Candies, 119 Cal.App.2d 497 (1953).

If owner operates a self-service grocery store, where customers are invited to inspect, remove, and replace goods on shelves, the exercise of ordinary care may require
the owner to take greater precautions and make more frequent inspections than would otherwise be needed to safeguard against the possibility that such a customer may create
a dangerous condition by disarranging the merchandise and creating potentially hazardous conditions. Oretega v. Kmart Corportion, 26 Cal.4th 1200.

Defendant did not have any documentation or evidence to show that inspection of the premises was made to remedy any dangerous conditions.

Evidence that an inspection has not been made within a particular period of time prior to an accident may warrant an inference in premises liability action that the defective
condition existed long enough so that a person exercising reasonable care would have discovered it. Id. Evidence that supermarket operator had not inspected aisle where
patron slipped on puddle of milk for at least 15 to 30 minutes, and that milk could have been on floor for as long as two hours, permitted reasonable inference in patron's premises
liability action that the dangerous condition existed long enough for it to be discovered by the owner. Id.

As a child Plaintiff suffered from polio resulting in a limp in his left leg rendering him partially disabled. Despite the limp, prior to the accident, Plaintiff was able to engage in
his daily life activities without restrictions. Although Plaintiff had a limp in his left leg, he did not need the assistance of a walker, cane, and/or wheelchair. After the accident, however,
Plaintiff’s daily life activities were adversely affected.