3:25-cv-00576•Soto Rodriguez v. The Kroger Co.
Full text
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION MARIA DEL ROSARIO SOTO RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff, v. THE KROGER CO., Defendant. § § § § § § § § § § Civil Action No. 3:25-CV-0576-X MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Defendant The Kroger Co.’s Motion for Summary Judgment. (Doc. 12). Finding that the facts are uncontested, the Court GRANTS the motion. This is a classic slip-and-fall premises liability case. Plaintiff Maria Del Rosario Soto slipped and fell while at “a Kroger store at 3770 Belt Line Rd, Addison, Texas” and brought premises liability, and respondeat superior claims against The Kroger Co. in state court.1 Kroger Co removed. Implicit in every premise liability or respondeat superior claim is the fact that the defendant owns the property or employs the negligent party.2 The uncontested facts are that Kroger Co. did not own or operate the Kroger store where the accident 1 Doc. 13.2 at 9–12. 2 United Scaffolding, Inc. v. Levine, 537 S.W.3d 463, 474 (Tex. 2017); Painter v. Amerimex Drilling I, Ltd., 561 S.W.3d 125, 131 (Tex. 2018). Case 3:25-cv-00576-X Document 14 Filed 01/08/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID <pageID>
2 occurred, nor did it employ any of the employees allegedly involved.3 And Soto has failed to provide any facts showing otherwise. Accordingly, Kroger Co. is entitled to judgment as a matter of law and Soto’s claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of January, 2026. ___________________________________ BRANTLEY STARR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3 Doc. 13.2 at 2, 46. Case 3:25-cv-00576-X Document 14 Filed 01/08/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID <pageID>
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.