Duffee-Freeman, Inc. v. Knudsen, DUFFEE-FREEMA
| Decision Date | 07 May 1954 |
| Docket Number | DUFFEE-FREEMA,No. 1,No. 35053,I,35053,1 |
| Citation | 82 S.E.2d 44,90 Ga.App. 111 |
| Parties | nc. v. KNUDSEN |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
The exception is to a judgment overruling the renewed general demurrer of the defendant, Duffee-Freeman, Inc., to the amended petition of Kennth P. Knudsen, Jr., in which the following allegations, in substance, were made: The defendant is the owner of a building known as 843-845 Peachtree Street in Atlanta, and leased office space on the second floor of the building to several tenants. Access to the second floor is by a street entrance, consisting of two flights of stairs, the first flight leading from street level to a landing, and the second flight from the landing to the second floor. Handrails are provided for both sides of both flights of stairs. The defendant retained control supervision, and a qualified possession of the common stairway, to maintain it for the use of its tenants and their customers and invitees. The petitioner went onto the stairway from the street to fulfil a previously made business appointment with a tenant on the second floor. He reached the landing at the head of the first flight of stairs, and proceeded to walk up the second flight. At the second step, he observed a coat hanger attached to his trouser leg. He stopped to remove the coat hanger and placed his hand upon the right handrail to stabilize himself. The handrail gave way and came loose from the wall, causing the petitioner to fall backward on the landing and down the first flight of stairs to the ground floor. The section of the round, wooden handrail upon which he had placed his hand was about three feet long and, with its metal wall bracket, was detached completely from the wall. The section of handrail was not well secured, was in a loose and dangerous condition, and was insufficient to provide support and balance. It was attached to the plaster wall by a metal wall bracket at its lower end, and this bracket was loosely connected to the plaster wall by screws. The lower end of the three-foot section of railing was joined to the bracket by two screws, and the upper end was fastened by only one screw to the next wall bracket, to which the next 13-foot length of railing was also fastened. The three-foot section of handrail had been in a loose condition for more than a week before the petitioner fell. The defendant, through its janitor or other agents, having the duty of maintaining the handrail, could have discovered its condition by placing a hand upon the three-foot section to test it for stability; and, in the exercise of ordinary care to render the premises safe, the defendant should have known of this condition by inspection and should have repaired it. The petitioner, while using the stairway and handrails for the purpose for which they had been provided, had neither warning or knowledge, nor appreciation of the risk involved...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ballard v. Southern Regional Medical Center, Inc.
...of the defect there was an absence of evidence as to the period of time the condition existed. Compare Duffee-Freeman, Inc. v. Knudsen, 90 Ga.App. 111(1), 82 S.E.2d 44 (1954), where there was evidence that the handrail appeared in a loosened state for more than a Thus, even though Southern ......
-
Knudsen v. Duffee-Freeman, Inc.
...owned and maintained by the defendant. The substantial allegations of the plaintiff's petition are set forth in Duffee-Freeman, Inc. v. Knudsen, 90 Ga.App. 111, 82 S.E.2d 44, and will not be repeated here. On the trial of the case and at the conclusion of all the evidence, the trial court d......