With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". testimony that dislocation is a known risk of hip replacement surgery. Moreover, there was no expert testimony indicating that the slip constituted a breach of the standard of care. Thus, it was for the jury to decide whether Dr. Witten was negligent when he slipped on liquid in the operating room while holding Mr. Pack’s leg. Therefore, we conclude that the Court of Appeals erred in holding that Dr. Witten was negligent as a matter of law, and that the circuit court correctly denied Appellee’s directed verdict motion. See Bierman, 967 S.W.2d at 18. III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the decision of the Court of Appeals and reinstate the judgment of the circuit court. All sitting. All concur. 1 . See Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Lawson, 984 S.W.2d 485 (Ky.App.1998) (<HOLDING>); Jones v. Winn-Dixie of Louisville, Inc., 458

A: holding that negligence of a store customer in failing to perceive a strip of black substance was a question for the jury
B: recognizing that evidence regarding the high price the defendant had paid for the substance in question was relevant to show the substance was cocaine
C: 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
D: holding a store vicariously liable for wrongful death when its employee shot and killed a customer
A.