Brown v. Carlisle
| Decision Date | 22 August 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. A94A1618,A94A1618 |
| Citation | 214 Ga.App. 483,448 S.E.2d 256 |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
| Parties | BROWN et al. v. CARLISLE et al. |
Smith & Wallis, Kenneth A. Smith, and Christopher B. Scott, for appellants.
Key & Kirby, L. Jack Kirby, for appellees.
Thomas J. Brown, Jr. and Elizabeth D. Brown appeal the grant of directed verdict at the trial of their suit against Leonard Carlisle d/b/a Carlisle Construction, Inc. and Carlisle Construction, for injuries sustained by Brown while defendants were building their house. The evidence, viewed in favor of respondent Brown on defendants' motion for directed verdict, shows that Brown went to the premises to install wiring, at night after Carlisle's workmen had left the site. He opened a door that was intended to lead to a back porch, but there was no porch and he fell about ten feet. The house was not fully Sheetrocked; the door he opened did not have a knob. Brown contends he had warned Carlisle many times to put a barrier across such doors because of the obvious danger. He contended that if a bar had been placed across the door he would not have tried to go through the door opening. Held:
A directed verdict is proper when all the evidence introduced and all reasonable inferences therefrom, construed in favor of the non-moving party, demand a particular verdict. OCGA § 9-11-50(a); Gary v. E. Frank Miller Constr. Co., 208 Ga.App. 73, 75, 430 S.E.2d 182. The directed verdict in this case was correct. The evidence demands a conclusion that Brown knew there was no back porch. He went to the house site on a daily basis and even made a joke of seeing how many boards had been put up each day. He had spent time admiring the other porches on the house, he had spent this day cleaning up debris around the house and he had examined the progress. He returned to the house site after supper to do electrical work and he erected temporary lights inside using extension cords. It was light inside the house, but when he opened the back porch door, it was dark outside. However, he cannot suggest he thought he saw a porch because it was pitch dark outside and there was no porch. Brown had equal knowledge that no bar had been nailed across the door, and of the danger inherent in walking through a door where there is no porch and there is no restraint across the door. He did not check to see if this door was barred on this day because it "wasn't prevalent in my mind." In fact, it was obvious that there was no bar across the door, but he was not paying attention to that fact. He was thinking he needed to go onto the back porch to install an electrical apparatus; he walked through the door opening thinking, "porch, porch," but he knew there was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson v. Kroger Co.
...126(5), 381 S.E.2d 283 (1989); Wynne v. Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., 159 Ga. 623(2), 126 S.E. 388 (1925); and Brown v. Carlisle, 214 Ga.App. 483, 484, 448 S.E.2d 256 (1994) (where the court noted that the issue of a plaintiff's exercise of due care for personal safety is ordinarily a ques......
-
Ballenger Paving Co. v. Gaines
...contractor). 27. (Citations omitted.) City of Winder v. Girone, 265 Ga. 723, 724(2), 462 S.E.2d 704 (1995). 28. Brown v. Carlisle, 214 Ga.App. 483, 484, 448 S.E.2d 256 (1994). 29. See OCGA §§ 15-12-40(b)(1), 15-12-42(b). 30. Anthony v. State, 213 Ga.App. 303, 305(2), 444 S.E.2d 393 (1994). ......
-
Clive v. Gregory
...the risk is clear and palpable. Ballenger Paving Co. v. Gaines, 231 Ga.App. 565, 572(3), 499 S.E.2d 722 (1998); Brown v. Carlisle, 214 Ga.App. 483, 484, 448 S.E.2d 256 (1994). Therefore, Stringer Lumber has not shown that the defect was not hidden so that the acceptance doctrine should appl......
-
Rappenecker v. LSE, INC.
...property, there can be no recovery if the plaintiff fails to exercise reasonable care to avoid the danger. Brown v. Carlisle, 214 Ga.App. 483, 484, 448 S.E.2d 256 (1994). Here, Rappenecker deliberately opted to leave the safety of the vehicle in order to confront the person who had blocked ......
-
Torts - Cynthia Trimboli Adams and Charles R. Adams Iii
...S.E.2d 93 (1995) (collapsed awning); McCurley v. Ludwig, 215 Ga. App. 798, 452 S.E.2d 554 (1994) (collapsed roof); Brown v. Carlisle, 214 Ga. App. 483,448 S.E.2d 256 (1994) (no porch floor). 11. Kroger Co. v. Bailey, 212 Ga. App. 568, 442 S.E.2d 480 (1994) (plaintiff run over by shopping ca......