With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". judicial admissions should be “narrowly construed.” Lewis v. Kenady, 894 S.W.2d 619, 622 (Ky.1994). Whether a statement is a judicial admission is a question of law that we review de novo. Reece v. Dixie Warehouse and Cartage Co., 188 S.W.3d 440, 448 (Ky.App.2006). We disagree with the Court of Appeals that Dr. Witten’s testimony constituted a judicial admission of negligence. Although Dr. Witten admitted to slipping, he denies that it caused Mr. Pack’s hip to become dislocated. Dr. Witten testified that, soon after he slipped, he put Mr. Pack’s hip through a range of motion to confirm that he had not dislocated it. In fact, there was a disputed issue of fact among the witnesses as to whether the slip caused the dislocation. In particular, Appellants presented W.2d 767 (Ky.1970) (<HOLDING>); Hornbeck v. Food Basket No. 1, 494 S.W.2d 87

A: holding that grocery store did not have duty to foresee and protect customer from rowdy children
B: holding that negligence of a pedestrian in tripping over a concrete abatement on the premises of a grocery store was a question to be resolved by the jury
C: holding that allegations of future injury must be particular and concrete
D: holding that whether a customer was negligent in failing to observe a bundle of grocery sacks on the floor before stepping toward it is a jury question
B.