ORLANDO, Fla. (Legal Newsline) - No one could have predicted a man's psychotic break at a Winn-Dixie would lead to a melee that broke a customer's hip, the grocery chain is arguing.
The company in November moved for summary judgment in a lawsuit brought by Ivanka Gueorguiva in Florida's Orange County Circuit Court. Gueorguiva sued in 2021, alleging a good Samaritan rushing to the aid of a cashier being assaulted accidentally knocked her over, breaking her hip.
But Gueorguiva and her lawyers can't prove the criminal attack was foreseeable, Winn-Dixie says.
"Plaintiff's alleged injuries came from a bystander who knocked her down while rushing to stop the attack on Ms. Gomez, not from Plaintiff being attacked directly by Mr. Williams," the motion says.
"This distinction is important because there is no case law in Florida that supports the theory that it is reasonably foreseeable to Winn-Dixie that a third-party bystander would knock down an invitee, causing injury, when rushing to stop an unforeseeable attack by another, specifically a psychotic patron."
The incident occurred Dec. 9, 2019, at a Winn-Dixie in Apopka. Jeremiah Williams believed cashier Crystal Gomez had kicked him in the leg twice and given him the middle finger.
Williams knocked her down and punched her in the face several times, causing bystanders to rush to stop him. Gueorguiva was standing near a self-service checkout kiosk and was bumped by one of the other customers.
Customers held Williams on the ground until police arrived. Though he was charged with felony battery, he has not been found mentally competent to stand trial, the motion says.
The lawsuit against Winn-Dixie says it failed to keep customers safe or address a longtime loiterer of its premises.
"To survive summary judgment, Plaintiff will attempt to argue that Winn-Dixie's negligence flows from Mr. Williams because he used to frequently visit the store," Winn-Dixie's motion says.
"However, this argument fails because it is not supported by Florida law, attempts to impermissibly stack inferences, and does not create a material issue of fact for the jury because it is irrelevant in determining whether Winn-Dixie had actual or constructive knowledge of prior similar attacks which then activates a duty under Florida law to protect invitees from criminal attack because they are foreseeable."