Slip and Fall at King Soopers – Larimer County

June 2004
ŸAge 71 – Left shoulder rotator cuff tear requiring surgery
Total medical expenses:  $10,000
Final offer before trial:  $35,000
TOTAL JUDGMENT:  $722,668

LARIMER COUNTY DISTRICT COURT

Patricia Keeton vs. Dillon Companies, Inc., a Kansas Corporation, doing business under the trade name of King Soopers, Inc.

Case No: 02-CV-635

Judge: Jolene Carmen Blair

Trial Dates: June 21, 2004 — June 24, 2004

Plaintiff’s Attorney: David S. Hoover (Hoover Law Firm)

Defendant’s Attorney: Steven R. Higgins (White & Steele)

Type of Claim: Personal Injury – Slip and Fall. Plaintiff Patricia Keeton alleged that while shopping at King Soopers, her grocery cart and the cart being pushed by a King Soopers employee collided, causing Ms. Keeton to fall and injure her left shoulder. Defendant denied liability and alleged that its employee acted reasonably and that his shopping cart was clearly visible to the Plaintiff.

Defendant claims Ms. Keeton was comparatively negligent in failing to avoid or otherwise maneuver around defendant employee’s shopping cart and thus bares equal responsibility. Defendant also disputed causation and the nature and extent of plaintiff’s injuries.

Injuries Alleged: While Ms. Keeton, age 71, expressed no physical complaints immediately after her fall, she was eventually diagnosed with a left shoulder rotator cuff tear requiring surgery that resulted in a reduced range of motion of the shoulder. Medical bills were approximately $10,000.

Final Demand Before Trial: Unspecified according to the plaintiff’s attorney

Final Offer Before Trial: $35,000 statutory offer of settlement filed by defendant’s attorney

Plaintiff’s Expert Witnesses: Sally A. Knauer, M.D.(treating orthopedic surgeon)

Defendant’s Expert Witnesses: None

Verdict: For the plaintiff:

• $10,126.24 for medical bills
• $400,215.32 for non-economic losses
• $150,000.00 for physical impairment

Total Verdict: $560,341.56

Note: Upon Motion by the defendant, the Court found King Soopers employee’s acts and omissions were not clear and convincing evidence to justify exceeding the statutory limit. The Court then reduced the non­economic damages to $366,250.00. Defendant’s appealed on grounds that the judge refused to instruct the jury on the issue of comparative negligence and that the jury’s verdict was excessive as a result of alleged improper statements by plaintiff’s counsel, which inappropriately aroused the jury’s passion and prejudice. On December 12, 2005 Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment. Plaintiff filed motions for interest and costs.

©2008 Jury Verdict Reporter of Colorado
All rights including the right to reproduce copies.
Reproduced with the express written consent of the JVRC.