In the matter of BARBARA JENKINS vs. 69 MARSHALL FOODS, LLC, et al, Adam Gilberg successfully defended a Motion for Summary Judgement filed by the Corporate food store giant in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County.  The Defendant, a multi-billion dollar grocery store conglomerate, acted negligently when it permitted customers to borrow electric shopping carts without securing or detaching the long power charging cord.  As a result, an elderly handicapped shopper dragged the cord through the store as she was attempting to shop.  The Plaintiff was caused to trip over the loose cord and fall hard onto her knees inside the store.  As a result the Plaintiff suffered serious and permanent injuries.  The Defendant filed a motion for summary judgement with the Court, asking that the Court dismiss them from the case arguing that they were not responsible for the dangerous condition.  Instead the Fresh Grocer tried to blame the little old lady driving the electric shopping cart.

In a personal injury case, a motion for summary judgment (MSJ) is a request asking the judge to decide the case — or part of it — without a jury trial. The moving party argues that there are no real disputes about the important facts and that, under the law, they are entitled to judgment. An MSJ is about whether a jury is legally needed to resolve the case.  In this particular case, the Defendant was trying to evade their high duty of care owed to customers in their stores.  What is even worse, is in addition to trying to claim a lack of negligence, The Fresh Grocer tried to shift the blame to it’s own customers.

Judge Kennedy of the Philadelphia Bench, was having none of the Defendant’s argument, and swiftly denied the motion filed by The Fresh Grocer.  This effectively shut down the Defendant’s strategy, and has opened the door for the Plaintiff to force this case to trial where she is looking to score a big win for the average working person and against the corporate greed dominating insurance defense in the City of Philadelphia.