Gurren v. Casperson
| Decision Date | 27 March 1928 |
| Docket Number | 20901. |
| Parties | GURREN v. CASPERSON et al. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 1.
Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Austin E. Griffith, Judge.
Action by Winifred J. Gurren against Daniel Casperson and wife and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and named defendants appeal. Affirmed.
R. C Hazen, of Seattle, for appellants.
Frank M. Egan and George A. Meagher, both of Seattle, for respondent.
The defendants Casperson owned and operated the Commodore Hotel in Seattle, Wash. They had the usual employees of hotels of the size of this, consisting of a day and night clerk, bell boys, switchboard operator, etc. The plaintiff occupied a room in the hotel, and in her complaint alleges that she was a guest of the hotel, and this allegation is admitted by the answer of the defendants
On the evening of September 11, 1926, the plaintiff returned to the hotel at about 11:30 p. m., and went to her room. Very shortly thereafter the defendant Sullivan entered plaintiff's room, and it at once became apparent that he was intoxicated. He refused to leave the room, when ordered to do so by the plaintiff, and she immediately called the clerk on the house phone, and some one of the employees of the hotel immediately came up, and the defendant Sullivan was ejected. The plaintiff again called the clerk of the hotel and requested that the defendant Sullivan be kept away from her room. A short time thereafter the plaintiff unlocked her door and started to cross the corridor, when she was assaulted by the defendant Sullivan, who struck her knocked her down, cutting her face and beating her until she was unconscious. The testimony is conclusive that the plaintiff did not know the defendant Sullivan, and had never seen him before the night of the assault.
The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants Casperson, as owners and proprietors of the hotel, and against Sullivan, who actually committed the assault.
The case was tried before the court without a jury, and, from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the defendants Casperson have appealed.
No error is predicated upon the admission or rejection of testimony, nor upon any of the findings of fact. Error seems to be predicated upon the refusal of the court to grant a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. A careful examination of the affidavits filed in support of the motion for a new trial fails to disclose that the trial court erred in denying the motion for a new trial.
The only other question in the case concerns the duty which a landlord of a hotel owes to his guests.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McKown v. Simon Prop. Grp., Inc.
...the duty to his guests to exercise reasonable care to protect them from injury at the hands of a fellow guest”); Gurren v. Casperson, 147 Wash. 257, 258–59, 265 P. 472 (1928) (holding a business owner must protect invitees against injury caused by third persons).¶ 48 In Nivens, we recognize......
-
Kim v. Budget Rent A Car Systems, Inc.
...Niece v. Elmview Group Home, 131 Wash.2d 39, 929 P.2d 420 (1997) (party entrusted with the care of a dependant); Gurren v. Casperson, 147 Wash. 257, 265 P. 472 (1928) (innkeeper to guest). And second, we have imposed a duty where there is a "special relationship" with the criminal. See, e.g......
-
Thetford v. City of Clanton
...the hotel's security were issues for the jury, as was the question of reasonable foreseeability of a criminal act. In Gurren v. Casperson, 147 Wash. 257, 265 P. 472 (1928), a female guest in a hotel, who was assaulted by another guest after she had expressly warned the hotel telephone opera......
-
Nivens v. 7-11 Hoagy's Corner
...assault of its staff person upon a resident because it was entrusted with the resident's well being. See also Gurren v. Casperson, 147 Wash. 257, 259, 265 P. 472 (1928) (hotel has duty to protect guests against violent acts of other guests when guest has specifically warned hotel of possibi......
-
Chapter § 4.04 LIABILITY OF HOTELS AND RESORTS FOR COMMON TRAVEL PROBLEMS
...39, 929 P.2d 420 (1997) (resident of group home raped by employee; negligent hiring, retention and supervision); Gur- ren v. Casperson, 147 Wash. 257, 265 P. 472 (1928) (female assaulted by another guest; hotel warned of possibility of assault).[259] See, e.g.: Four th Circuit: Allen v. Gre......