A Brookings, South Dakota Hy-Vee store has been sued for the second time this year by a customer who says she was injured by an automatic door.

The lawsuit filed by Marlene Duffy and her husband, Bernard, says Marlene was leaving the store on Sept. 1 when she was hit by the automatic door. The collision caused her to fall down, and she sustained serious injuries to her hip, knee elbow and wrist. She required surgery and nursing home care following the accident.

“Marlene now requires assistance with basic day-to-day activities such as using the restroom and bathing,” the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit also says that Hy-Vee had been warned prior to the accident that the doors were not working properly, but took no action to repair the doors.

More:Woman claims Hy-Vee door knocked her down, causing injuries

“Hy-Vee intentionally and/or knowingly breached its duties owed to the Duffys and other invitees by failing to perform necessary maintenance, repairs, or replacement that needed to be done with automatic doors even after it learned that the automatic doors had previously caused severe injuries to at least one other customer,” the lawsuit says.

Hy-Vee spokeswoman Tina Potthoff said in an email that the grocery chain does not comment on pending litigation.

The Duffy lawsuit comes at the same time that Hy-Vee settled a lawsuit brought by Julie Hallan. Hallan was injured when she was struck by the door on Dec. 9, 2018. The fall caused Hallan to break her hip. The terms of the settlement are confidential.

In the Hallan lawsuit, Hy-Vee was accused of intentionally destroying video of the doors in the days leading up to the accident. The case settled before a judge could rule on whether Hy-Vee should be sanctioned.

But in a third case filed in state court by a Yankton woman, Judge David Knoff sanctioned the company for destroying video of the parking lot. That case was brought by a woman who fell in the parking lot after Hy-Vee failed to clear snow and ice several days after a snow storm.

Knoff sanctioned the company for destroying the video in bad faith after it had received a preservation order.