Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 03-11-2016

Case Style: Teri Gresham v. The City of Del City

Case Number: CJ-215-2307

Judge: Thomas E. Prince

Court: District Court, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Matt Patterson and Wes Cherry

Defendant's Attorney: Bob Lafferrandre

Description: Oklahoma City, OK - Teri Gresham sued The City of Del City on a governmental tort claim theory under 51 O.S. 151, et seq. claiming:

1. Personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction are proper in Oklahoma County, State of Oklahoma as the incident in question arose in said county.
2. That the Plaintiff, Teri Gresham, is a resident and citizen of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma County, State of Oklahoma.
3. Venue is proper in Oklahoma County, Oklahoma pursuant to 12 O.S. 139.
4. That the Defendant, The City of Del City, is a political subdivision as that term is defined by the Governmental Tort Claims Act, 51 O.S. 151 et seq. That Plaintiff has filed a claim with Defendant which has been rejected by the passage of time. That this action is brought within the time frame allowed by law.
5. That on July 19, 2014 Plaintiff was an invitee and lawfully on the premises of the Defendant's community center in Del City, Oklahoma County, Oklahoma.
6. On that date Plaintiff was helping clean up after a wedding in the Defendant's community center when Plaintiff slipped and fell on a wet area of the floor as she was carrying items.

Employees of the Defendant were aware of the wet area and failed to notify Plaintiff or place "Wet Floor" signs to warn Plaintiff. Plaintiff suffered a broken ankle as a result of Defendant's negligence.
7. The facility was in that condition due to the negligent acts and omissions of the Defendant. Such negligent acts or omissions include but are not limited to Defendant's failure to maintain clean and adequate floors and/or display proper signage to ensure the safety of the Plaintiff and/or any other guest in the facility.
8. Solely as a result of Defendant's negligent acts and omissions, its conduct, and its breach of care, Plaintiff has sustained serious and severe injuries to her person, without any negligence of the Plaintiff contributing thereto.
Causes of Action

9. The action heretofore mentioned in Paragraphs No. 6, No. 7 and No. 8 of this Petition was caused by the negligence of Defendant.

10. That as a result of Defendant's negligence, Plaintiff incurred and will incur medical expenses, suffered and will suffer physical and mental pain, suffered and will suffer physical impairments and disabilities, suffered lost wages, and was otherwise injured and damaged, each in the amount in excess of $75,000.00.

Outcome: Motion for summary judgment denied.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:


Find a Lawyer


Find a Case