Manes v. Hines & McNair Hotels, Inc.

• Decision Date: 30 November 1946
• Parties: MANES v. HINES & McNAIR HOTELS, Inc. (two cases).
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

197 S.W.2d 889

184 Tenn. 210

MANES v. HINES & McNAIR HOTELS, Inc. (two cases).

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

November 30, 1946

Error to Circuit Court, Knox County; Taylor H. Cox, Judge.

Separate actions by Ella Manes and by George Manes against Hines & McNair Hotels, Inc., to recover respectively for injuries sustained by first-named plaintiff and for medical expenses and loss of services by second-named plaintiff by reason of his wife's injuries. To review a judgment of the Court of Appeals reversing a judgment of the trial court which sustained a motion for a directed verdict for defendant defendant brings certiorari.

Judgment of the Court of Appeals reversed and that of trial court affirmed.

Wilbur W. Piper and W. C. Lowery, both of Knoxville, for plaintiffs in error.

Joel H Anderson and Ayers & Parkey, all of Knoxville, for defendant in error.

PREWITT Justice.

Suit was brought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by Mrs. Ella Manes. Her husband also instituted a suit for medical expenses and loss of service. The cases were tried together. Mrs. Manes suffered injuries by falling on a slippery floor in the hallway on the fourth floor of the Watauga Hotel operated by defendants, which is located on the corner of Gay Street and Magnolia Avenue in the city of Knoxville. The circuit judge sustained a motion for a directed verdict at the close of the plaintiff's proof on the ground that Mrs. Manes was guilty of contributory negligence, she having knowledge of the slippery condition of the floor.

At the time Mrs. Manes received her injuries the Watauga Hotel was being operated by the defendants as an apartment hotel. Rooms were rented without maid service and the tenants were permitted to do a certain amount of cooking in their rooms and the plaintiffs were at liberty to do their cooking in their room. Mr. and Mrs. Manes had occupied rooms in this apartment building for about three years, and for about twelve months preceding the injuries to Mrs. Manes they had occupied a room on the fourth floor for which they paid a monthly rental of $12.

There was a rubber runner extending the length of the hallway leading to and from the rooms on the fourth floor and passing immediately in front of the door of the room occupied by Mr. and Mrs. Manes. The hallway was substantially 9 feet in width and the rubber mat or runner down the center of the hallway was 3 feet in width, so that there was floor space on each side of this runner of 3 feet. About 4 feet from the door of the Manes room and between the runner and the baseboard there was a wet spot on the floor caused by water dripping from an overhead hot water pipe. This wet spot was about 6 inches in diameter and somewhat oval in shape, and at times about 18 inches in length and extending over one or more of 3-inch floor boards. The tenants on the fourth floor appear to have been thoroughly familiar with this condition.

Mrs. Manes testified on cross-examination as follows:

'Q. You knew about the wet place? A. Yes sir.

'Q. And you had passed by that spot day after day and sometimes three or four times a day? A. Yes sir.'

On November 3, 1943, Mrs. Manes came out of her room with a Mrs. Page intending to go shopping. Mrs. Page came out of the room first and Mrs. Manes followed and closed the door, and after taking two or three steps, she slipped on account of stepping on the wet spot in the floor and fell, suffering a broken hip. At the time of the injury Mrs. Manes was sixty-five years of age. The fourth floor of the apartment hotel is reached by means of an elevator, and Mrs. Manes was on her way to the elevator at the time of her fall.

The negligence alleged in the declaration was (1) that defendants permitted the water piping to become and remain worn and defective and to exude moisture and water therefrom so that the same dripped to the floor of the hallway near the doorway of the plaintiffs; (2) that the water upon the floor caused the same to become wet and mildewed and the floor to become slippery; and (3) that defendants negligently caused the wooden floor at this point to be oiled by repeated applications of oil to the floor by mops and other utensils, so that the floor was rendered more slippery than ever.

The Court of Appeals reversed the judgment of the trial court, holding that the question of contributory negligence was one for the jury. The petition for certiorari has been granted and argument heard. Both plaintiffs and defendants concede that the relationship of landlord and tenant existed at the time rather than the relationship of innkeeper and guest.

It was the duty of Mrs. Manes to exercise ordinary care to avoid injury and to make reasonable use of her faculties to avoid danger; and if she used an...