The parties exactly as the court lists them—not a claim about the merits.
Southern Floors and Acoustics v. Max-Yeboah
031097 Southern Floors and Acoustics v. Max-Yeboah 04/23/2004 (Revised 07/01/2004) In a personal injury action against a grocery store, the issue of contributory negligence was properly submitted to the jury, …
The clerk's words are shown exactly as filed.Orders, motions, and filings in the clerk's own words and sequence.
The official docket and available court documents attached to every update.
031097 Southern Floors and Acoustics v. Max-Yeboah 04/23/2004 (Revised 07/01/2004) In a personal injury action against a grocery …
- Court
- Supreme Court of Virginia
- First added here
- October 4, 2026
- Last entry
- April 23, 2004
No bill or executive-order citation is attached to this file.
Case timeline
The clerk's wording is shown verbatim and linked to the court's own document page where available.
031097 Southern Floors and Acoustics v. Max-Yeboah 04/23/2004 (Revised 07/01/2004) In a personal injury action against a grocery store, the issue of contributory negligence was properly submitted to the jury, but the court erred in instructing the jury that the store could be liable for the negligence of an independent contractor working on the floors. The store did not have a duty to supervise the work and did not have actual or constructive knowledge of the condition causing plaintiff's injury. Final judgment is entered affirming in part and reversing in part.
Open court document ↗Rulings in this case over time
Courts at different levels and stages can reach different results in the same case. Each entry is the court's own record; read it before drawing a conclusion.
1 entry, oldest first.
· Supreme Court of Virginia
ReversedAffirmed
The court's record, as written
031097 Southern Floors and Acoustics v. Max-Yeboah 04/23/2004 (Revised 07/01/2004) In a personal injury action against a grocery store, the issue of contributory negligence was properly submitted to the jury, but the court erred in instructing the jury that the store could be liable for the negligence of an independent contractor working on the floors. The store did not have a duty to supervise the work and did not have actual or constructive knowledge of the condition causing plaintiff's injury. Final judgment is entered affirming in part and reversing in part.
Outcome words in this text: affirming, reversing.
Method: an entry is marked with an outcome only when its own text contains the outcome word, and the word is shown beside it. Orders, opinions and judgments whose text does not say are marked Other. Party filings, notices and routine procedural orders (appearances, extra pages, time extensions, scheduling) are not listed. No link between this case and any other case is recorded in our data, so only this case's own record is shown. Open the court's docket
