Jackson v. Kings Island

Decision Date13 June 1979
Docket NumberNo. 78-1017,78-1017
Citation58 Ohio St.2d 357,390 N.E.2d 810
Parties, 12 O.O.3d 321 JACKSON, Appellee, v. KINGS ISLAND, Appellant.
CourtOhio Supreme Court

As indicated by the Court of Appeals, the pleadings, affidavits and depositions in the trial court suggest the following facts: Charles C. Jackson, plaintiff-appellee herein, was 87 years old when on August 10, 1974, he went with a church group to an amusement park operated by defendant-appellant, Kings Island. Plaintiff decided to take a ride by himself on the Bavarian Beetle, a roller coaster consisting of a two-minute ride in a train of two cars. Plaintiff had not been on a roller coaster since he was a youngster, but he was generally aware of the action of a roller coaster and thought it would be a thrill to ride one again. Plaintiff said that he could not see the crucial part of the track at the bottom of the first drop as he waited in line for about 15 to 20 minutes. There was some evidence that this portion of the track was obstructed from plaintiff's view.

The operators of the Bavarian Beetle took particular notice of the plaintiff, in part because he was dressed somewhat unconventionally in a striped suit and tie, and in part due to his physical condition: plaintiff was particularly old, he walked slowly and jerkily, and he turned his entire body (as opposed to his head only) in addressing those who spoke to him. Plaintiff entered the ride with noticeable stiffness, sitting very erect in his seat with arms braced straight against the safety bar. The only conversation between plaintiff and the operators of the Bavarian Beetle disclosed by the record concerned the number of people in plaintiff's party, with plaintiff indicating that he was alone. 1

The train of cars was mechanically lifted to the top of the first and highest incline, then dropped sharply and went up a dip; brakes were applied automatically, and the train proceeded into a turn. The change of direction (either vertically in the dip or laterally in the turn, or both) jerked plaintiff. Plaintiff stated that he felt a "pop" in his neck, followed by "terrible pain all through my head." Plaintiff had difficulty walking after getting out of the car at the end of the ride, but was able to walk away. He was hospitalized immediately and underwent surgery about a week later for a broken neck.

Plaintiff initiated this action on October 27, 1975, seeking money damages for the alleged negligence of Kings Island in (1) failing to exercise ordinary care toward plaintiff, (2) failing to warn plaintiff of the dangerous condition of the ride, and (3) failing to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition. The trial court sustained the defendant's motion for summary judgment on the ground that under the present status of the law no duty existed under these circumstances for which the defendant could be held negligent. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that reasonable minds could find the facts necessary to establish a duty on the part of Kings Island to warn the plaintiff of the nature of the ride.

The cause is now before this court pursuant to the allowance of a motion to certify the record.

Robert H. Davis, Cincinnati, for appellee.

Rendigs, Fry, Kiely & Dennis and Frederick Brockmeier, IV, Cincinnati, for appellant.

PER CURIAM.

The only issue appealed to this court is whether the trial court acted improperly in sustaining defendant's motion for summary judgment by finding, as a matter of law, no duty on the part of defendant to warn plaintiff of the nature of the roller coaster ride.

The owner or occupier of premises is not an insurer of the safety of his invitees, but he does owe a duty to exercise ordinary or reasonable care for their protection. S. S. Kresge Co. v. Fader (1927), 116 Ohio St. 718, 158 N.E. 174; Railroad Co. v. Harvey (1907), 77 Ohio St. 235, 83 N.E. 66. This rule applies with equal force to proprietors of amusement parks. Cincinnati Base Ball Club Co. v. Eno (1925), 112 Ohio St. 175, 147 N.E. 86. But, the obligation of reasonable care is an extensive one, applicable to everything that threatens an invitee with an unreasonable risk of harm. Prosser on Torts 393 (4 Ed. 1971), Section 61. This includes the duty to warn patrons of dangerous conditions known to, or reasonably ascertainable by, a proprietor which a patron should not be expected to discover or protect himself against. Accordingly, the proprietor's duty is normally predicated upon his superior knowledge of a dangerous condition on his premises. Since a warning eliminates the disparity between the proprietor's and patron's knowledge of the dangerous condition, it is usually sufficient to discharge...

To continue reading

Request your trial
276 cases
  • Uddin v. Embassy Suites Hotel
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • 13 Diciembre 2005
    ...citing Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc. (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 203, 18 OBR 267, 480 N.E.2d 474, and Jackson v. Kings Island (1979), 58 Ohio St.2d 357, 358, 12 O.O.3d 321, 390 N.E.2d 810. However, the owner or occupier of a business premise is not an insurer of a business invitee's safety. ......
  • Nageotte v. Cafaro Co.
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • 29 Abril 2005
    ...dangers. Paschal v. Rite Aid Pharmacy, Inc. (1985), 18 Ohio St.3d 203, 18 OBR 267, 480 N.E.2d 474; Jackson v. Kings Island (1979), 58 Ohio St.2d 357, 358, 12 O.O.3d 321, 390 N.E.2d 810. The owner or occupier is not, however, an insurer of a business invitee's safety. Paschal, supra, at 203-......
  • Wright v. Vill. of Williamsport
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • 21 Junio 2019
    ...its invitees of latent or concealed dangers if the owner knows or has reason to know of the hidden dangers. Jackson v. Kings Island , 58 Ohio St.2d 357, 358, 390 N.E.2d 810 (1979). Invitees are expected, however, to take reasonable precautions to avoid dangers that are patent or obvious. Br......
  • Ray v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
    • United States
    • Ohio Court of Appeals
    • 20 Junio 2013
    ...of latent or concealed dangers, if the premises owner has actual or constructive knowledge of those dangers. Jackson v. Kings Island, 58 Ohio St.2d 357, 358, 390 N.E.2d 810 (1979); Perry, 53 Ohio St.2d at 52, 372 N.E.2d 335;Johnson v. Wagner Provision Co., 141 Ohio St. 584, 589, 49 N.E.2d 9......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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