Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Edwards v. Regis Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


April 27, 2010

CAROL EDWARDS, PLAINTIFF,
v.
REGIS CORP., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, AND WAL-MART STORES, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Michael M. Mihm United States District Judge

ORDER

Now before the Court is Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.'s ("Wal-Mart") Federal Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss. For the reasons set forth below, Wal-Mart's Motion [#10] is GRANTED.

On January 15, 2010, Plaintiff Carol Edwards ("Edwards") filed a Complaint against Wal-Mart and Regis Corp. ("Regis"), alleging negligence against both Wal-Mart and Regis. She alleges that she incurred injuries as a result of falling from a chair at the SmartStyle salon*fn1 located within the Wal-Mart at 8915 North Allen Road, Peoria, Illinois. On March 19, 2010, Wal-Mart filed its Motion to Dismiss, arguing that pursuant to the express terms of the Lease Agreement controlling Regis' use of the leased space within the Allen Road Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart took no part in either the maintenance or repair of the chair within the Regis beauty salon that is the subject of this litigation. Wal-Mart attached the August 11, 1999, Lease Agreement entered into by Wal-Mart and Regis, which provided that Regis was solely responsible for the maintenance and repair of the demised premises,*fn2 and which was in full force and effect at all times relevant to the allegations contained in Edwards' Complaint. Wal-Mart further argues that given Edwards' allegation of Wal-Mart's failure to exercise due care to ensure the chair was in a reasonably safe condition, and given the terms of the Lease Agreement, Wal-Mart should be dismissed from the case. Edwards filed her Response to Wal-Mart's Motion to Dismiss, stating that on the basis of the information contained in the Motion and its attached Exhibits A (Plaintiff's Complaint) and B (Wal-Mart Shopping Center Lease Agreement), she offered no objection to Wal-Mart's Motion to Dismiss.

Accordingly, Wal-Mart's Federal Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss [#10] is GRANTED, as Plaintiff Edwards does not oppose the motion. Wal-Mart is TERMINATED as a party from this case. This matter is referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.

ENTERED this 27th day of April, 2010.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.