Rosario Martinez v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois at Chicago D/b/a/ University of Illinois at Chicago Medical Center

OPINION

STORINO, J.

This claim is before the Court upon a recommendation from the assigned Commissioner following an evidentiary hearing.

Claimant, Rosario Martinez, brings this negligence claim seeking damages for injuries sustained when she fell on the third floor of the UIC Medical Clinic located at 1801 W. Taylor Street, Chicago, Illinois, on August 25, 2009. Claimant alleges that UIC was negligent in allowing or permitting the hallway floor to become slippery due to waxing or other finishing creating a slip hazard. Claimant filed the present Complaint with the Court of Claims on July 27, 2010.

DAMAGES

Claimant's complaint prayed for compensatory damages of $100,000.00.

APPLICABLE LAW

In order to prevail on an action of negligence, Claimant must prove that the Respondent owed a duty of care to Claimant and that Respondent breached that duty and that an injury was proximately caused by the breach. Bajwa

v. Metropolitan. Life Insurance Co., 208 Ill.2d 414, [*164] 281 Ill. Dec. 554, 804 N.E. 2nd 519 (2004). In order to recover in this action, Claimant bears the burden of proving, by preponderance of the evidence, that Respondent breached its duty of care, and that her injury was proximately caused by the negligence of Respondent. Id.

FINDINGS OF FACT

On August 25, 2009, just before noon, Claimant took her mother-in-law to a doctor's appointment on the third floor of the UIC Medical Clinic. She took her mother-in-law to the washroom and upon returning to the doctor's office she slipped and fell in an area of the hallway. Claimant testified that when she felt herself slip, she forced her body forward and fell on her knee. Claimant did not file an incident report immediately after the fall. On the following day she went to Marque Medicos because her arm and knee were swollen and filed an incident report with UIC. Marque Medicos gave her treatment for her knee and shoulder for approximately six months and Claimant testified that she still has trouble with her shoulder.

Claimant testified that the floor was shiny and that she thought it may have been over waxed. Claimant admitted that she did not know if there was wax or another substance on the floor or when any substance would have been applied. In addition, she admitted that she did not see any liquid substance on the floor, and that she did not know what caused the fall. There was no evidence presented that anyone else reported a problem with the floor. The photographs presented at the trial were taken the day after the incident.

Respondent offered three witnesses at the trial. Through their testimony it was ascertained that there was no wax or other substance applied to the floor of the hallway in question that could have caused Claimant's fall. It was also ascertained that there were no other reports of falls or of conditions that could have caused Claimant's fall.

Respondent's first witness, Kary Raines, Associate Director of Facilities Management at the time of the occurrence testified that he was in charge of the cleaning services for the outpatient clinic and has overseen floor care at UIC for about 30 years. He testified that all floor maintenance is done at night when there is little or no foot traffic at the clinic. In addition, he testified that the floors are stripped only once a year, which is the only process that involves a floor finish. Otherwise, the floors are scrubbed every night and varnished three times a week. The scrubbing is done with a chemical called Stride, a general purpose cleaner, which is mixed with water in an automatic dilution system. He testified that the scrubber does not cause chemical build up because it merely takes up floor soil. Varnishing of the floor, which keeps the shine on the floor, does not involve the use of any chemicals and is only done three times a week. Moreover, Mr. Raines testified that a supervisor inspects the cleaning work regularly. He also testified that in his 30 years of overseeing the floor care, he has never been made aware of any problems with floor practices.

Respondent's second witness, Cynthia Lozano, was employed on August 25, 2009, as a floater in the Department of Medicine Call Center and assigned to the heart center. She testified that around noon on that day, she heard a commotion and through her station saw that someone had fallen. She testified that she did not assist the patient, but saw that someone did provide assistance. Ms. Lozano testified that she did not see anything unusual with the floor in the area on that day and that it was not slippery. She also testified that she [*165] did not see anyone else fall in that area or have trouble with their footing. She testified that the cleaning of the floor is done at night and that she has never noticed the floors in that area to be slippery.

Respondent's third witness, Officer Keanna Love, testified that she was employed as a Police Office at UIC and that she completed Investigative Report No. 09-58949 on August 26, 2009, the day after the incident. As the report was taken the day after the incident, she was unable to investigate it. Office Keanna testified that to her knowledge there were no other slip and fall incidents at the location.

At trial, Claimant's arguments were merely speculative. Claimant failed to provide any evidence which would allow the Court to determine what substance, if any, existed in the UIC hallway floor that caused her fall. Proximate cause cannot be based on mere speculation or conjecture. Kimbrough v. Jewel Companies, 92 Ill.App.3d 813, 48 Ill. Dec. 297, 416 N.E. 2d 318 (1981). Respondent offered convincing and credible evidence that no condition existed on August 25, 2009, that could have been the actual and proximate cause of Claimant's fall. Accordingly, Claimant failed to establish that Respondent is liable to her for her damages.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Claimant's claim is DENIED.