Maddox v. K-Mart Corp

In Maddox v. K-Mart Corp., 565 So. 2d 14 (Ala. 1990) the court held that evidence that the substance that caused the fall appeared to be a cola soft drink that had partially dried "was at least a scintilla of evidence that the substance had been on the floor for such a length of time that constructive notice was imputed." (565 So. 2d at 16-17.) Moreover, the court in Maddox quoted Vargo v. Warehouse Groceries Mgt., Inc., 529 So. 2d 986 (Ala. 1988) as follows: "'Where the substance is dirty, crumpled, or mashed, or has some other characteristic [, e.g., is "'sticky,'"] that makes it reasonable to infer that it has been on the floor a long time, the defendant may be found to have a duty to discover and remove it.' Vargo, supra, at 986, citing S. H. Kress & Co. v. Thompson, 267 Ala. 566, 103 So. 2d 171 (1957)." (565 So. 2d at 17.)