Leo A. Fisher III v. Big Y Foods, Inc. — Palmer, J., dissenting

Summary

Justice Palmer, dissenting, would affirm the judgment for the plaintiff because the mode of operation rule should apply to hazards foreseeably arising anywhere from a self-service supermarket’s operations, not only in specially hazardous areas. He reasoned that the majority’s narrower approach improperly retreats from the rule’s policy foundations and reinstates the traditional notice requirement for most self-service premises claims. The dissent also concluded that the complaint adequately alleged a mode of operation claim and that the jury instructions were proper.