fbpx Skip to content

PERSONAL INJURY: Superior Court allows mode of operation claim at tire store

In Fisher v. Big Y Foods, Inc., 298 Conn. 414, 423 (2010), the CT Supreme Court held “that the mode of operation rule, as adopted in Connecticut, does not apply generally to all accidents caused by transitory hazards in self-service retail establishments, but rather, only to those accidents that result from particular hazards that occur regularly, or are inherently foreseeable, due to some specific method of operation employed on the premises.”

Here, the plaintiff visited a Town Fair Tire store and allegedly fell on a collection of plastic newspaper straps and debris as he stepped to avoid a large concrete block located adjacent to the rear exit stairs.  The plaintiff alleged that the defendant was negligent pursuant to a commercial mode of operation theory. In denying the defendant’s motion to strike, while recognizing that the mode of operation theory does not apply to all self-service retail establishments, the court held that the plaintiff’s allegations were sufficient and therefore denied the motion to strike.

The ruling has no discussion of the particular facts and how they could satisfy the mode of operation rule.

Lucas v. Stratford Town Fair Associates, LLP, No. NNHCV136039047S, 2015 WL 1727369 (Conn. Super. Ct. Mar. 19, 2015)