Gary Hotel Courts, Inc. v. Perry, 56479

Decision Date07 November 1978
Docket NumberNo. 56479,56479
Citation251 S.E.2d 37,148 Ga.App. 22
Parties. v. PERRY. Court of Appeals of Georgia
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

N. Forrest Montet, David M. Leonard, Atlanta, for appellant.

Lewis, Bynum & Kell, T. J. Lewis, Jr., Atlanta, for appellee.

McMURRAY, Judge.

This is a personal injury case. The injury occurred when plaintiff Perry, while a motel guest sat in a wooden frame lounge chair ("easy chair") located in a motel room where he and his family were paying guests. Plaintiff testified that the chair appeared to be in good condition with nothing wrong with it, but when he sat in the chair the cushion fell through, causing him to sit on the floor. The cushion fell through the wooden frame because the webbing which normally would have been under the seat cushion supporting the seat cushion was, for some unknown reason, missing in its entirety in this particular chair.

The defendant (owner of the motel) contends it had no actual knowledge of the lack of webbing, and the evidence did not disclose how long the webbing in the seat frame of the chair had been missing, nor was there any evidence as to the cause of its absence. It also contends that there was no evidence that it either inspected the chair in question prior to the injury, or had any reason to inspect the particular chair in question. However, the evidence disclosed that the defendant's employees cleaned and inspected the rooms daily although defendant had never in the past received any complaints about this particular chair involved or any incident similar to the one in which plaintiff contends he was injured.

At the close of all of the evidence defendant moved for a directed verdict in its favor and against all claims of the plaintiff, contending plaintiff had failed to prove a violation of any duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff; failed to prove any act of negligence on the part of the defendant which in any way caused or contributed to his injuries; and failed to prove a right of recovery against the defendant as a matter of law. Defendant's motion was denied. A verdict was rendered for the plaintiff, and judgment entered. Defendant's timely motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was denied, and defendant appeals. Held:

1. An innkeeper owes to his patrons the duty to exercise ordinary care to afford them premises that are reasonably safe for use and occupancy. Holloman v. Henry Grady Hotel Co., 42 Ga.App. 347, 348, 156 S.E. 275; Hotel Richmond, Inc. v. Wilkinson, 73 Ga.App. 36, 35 S.E.2d 536. Plaintiff presented evidence that he was injured when he sat in defendant's chair in defendant's motel room and the seat cushion fell through the bottom to the floor which was the proximate cause of his back injury. This evidence thus presented a question of fact for jury determination as to whether the defendant innkeeper had breached its duty of ordinary care and diligence in furnishing the plaintiff a reasonably safe room. "The question of a violation of 'the duty to exercise ordinary care to afford (guests) premises that are reasonably safe for use and occupancy,' which is the duty an innkeeper owes his guests, is a question of negligence and . . . such matters are for the jury except in plain, palpable and indisputable cases." Hillinghorst v. Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc., 104 Ga.App. 731, 735, 122 S.E.2d 751, 754. The above decision was cited by the trial court in its order denying the motion and also the case of Palagano v. Georgian Terrace Hotel Co., 123 Ga.App. 502, 181 S.E.2d 512, wherein injury was sustained from the collapse of a bed in the defendant's hotel. The trial court in the case sub judice states that in that case (Palagano, supra), "There was some evidence from which a jury might find that the bed was defective and that such defect...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Ashbaugh v. Windsor Capital Grp., Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • June 18, 2012
    ...512 (1971) (citing Hillinghorst v. Heart of Atlanta Motel, 104 Ga. App. 731, 735, 122 S.E.2d 751 (1961)); Gary Hotel Courts, Inc. v. Perry, 148 Ga. App. 22, 24, 251 S.E.2d 37 (1978). There is no question that this standard applies to Windsor but here, unlike in the cited cases, there is no ......
  • Atlanta Auto Auction v. Ryles, 56459
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • November 7, 1978
    ... ... 21] sold to McDonald Chevrolet-Oldsmobile, Inc. for ... the term of June 15, 1977, until the ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT