A dispute over responsibility for injuries caused by a windblown patio umbrella at a local bar is set to continue after an appellate court determined that questions remain about whether the incident was truly unforeseeable or involved possible negligence. The decision matters because it could clarify when businesses must take extra precautions to protect patrons from unexpected weather events.
The appeal was filed by Tiffany Colwell in the Twelfth Appellate District of Ohio, Butler County, on March 23, 2026, against Bob & Shawn Enterprises LLC, doing business as Our Place Saloon. Colwell challenged the earlier ruling from the Butler County Court of Common Pleas that had granted summary judgment in favor of the Saloon on her negligence claim.
According to court documents, Colwell was injured on October 10, 2021, while seated at an outdoor patio table at Our Place Saloon. A sudden gust of wind dislodged her table’s open umbrella from its pedestal base and blew it sideways, striking her in the face and breaking her nose. Video evidence captured the incident. Colwell received medical treatment for her injuries.
Colwell filed suit in September 2023 alleging negligence by the Saloon. She argued that the business failed to secure its umbrellas properly or implement policies for their removal during windy conditions. Testimony revealed that while employees typically brought umbrellas inside at night, there were no procedures regarding removal during adverse weather. Robert King, owner of Bob & Shawn Enterprises LLC, testified he considered it “common sense” to take down umbrellas if it was windy but acknowledged no formal policy existed and no additional securing features were used on the bases.
Weather conditions on the day of the incident were described inconsistently in depositions: King recalled it being sunny with suddenly increasing winds but did not know wind speeds; Colwell described it as windy when she sat down and agreed with an attorney’s characterization of a “strong wind.”
The trial court initially ruled in favor of Our Place Saloon, finding that there was “zero evidence” suggesting unusually strong winds were common at the location or that prior incidents had occurred with umbrellas becoming dislodged. The court also noted no expert testimony had been provided regarding whether placement or securing methods for umbrellas were negligent or what reasonable steps should have been taken.
However, upon review, Judges Byrne and Powell concluded that granting summary judgment was premature because genuine issues remained about foreseeability and causation—key elements in negligence cases under Ohio law. The opinion stated: “We therefore find that, as a matter of law, the Saloon owed a duty of care to Colwell that included an obligation to protect her from injuries that may arise if wind lifted a patio umbrella and blew it through the air.” The judges pointed out examples from other states where similar risks were deemed foreseeable.
The appellate opinion emphasized that breach of duty is generally a question for juries rather than judges unless facts are undisputed. In this case, evidence showed no employee policy for monitoring weather or removing umbrellas during windy conditions and no securing mechanisms beyond basic bases without screws or fasteners.
On proximate cause—the legal link between alleged negligence and injury—the majority found insufficient evidence to rule definitively that only an unforeseeable act of God caused Colwell’s injury. They noted conflicting accounts about wind strength and lack of proof regarding overwhelming natural forces such as tornado-level gusts. As such, they wrote: “A reasonable jury could conclude that there was no unusual or overwhelming burst of wind…the jury could also reach different conclusions about whether the Saloon’s failure to take any steps to protect against wind was a proximate cause.”
As relief, Colwell seeks damages related to her injuries allegedly resulting from negligence by Our Place Saloon in failing to secure its outdoor furniture adequately or warn patrons about potential hazards during inclement weather.
Judge Piper dissented from his colleagues’ decision to reverse summary judgment. He argued there was no evidence showing what actions would have prevented this type of accident or establishing foreseeability based on past incidents or typical weather patterns at the location: “Colwell failed to present any evidence of what actions a reasonably prudent establishment could have taken…to prevent this unforeseeable event.” Judge Piper maintained that holding otherwise would make businesses insurers for all accidents involving natural forces beyond their control.
The appellate panel ordered reversal and remand for further proceedings consistent with their opinion so factual disputes can be resolved at trial rather than dismissed outright.
Tiffany Colwell is represented by Kory A. Veletean of O’Connor, Acciani & Levy LPA; Bob & Shawn Enterprises LLC is represented by David T. Davidson of Davidson Law Offices Co., LPA. The case identification number is CA2024-11-131.
Source: 2026Ohio976_Colwell_v_Bob_and_Shawn_Enterprises_LLC_Opinion_Ohio_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
