Martin v. Henson

• Decision Date: 01 May 1957
• Docket Number: No. 36644,No. 2,36644,2
• Citation: 95 Ga.App. 715,99 S.E.2d 251
• Parties: Roy E. MARTIN et al. v. Mrs. Carlton HENSON
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 251

99 S.E.2d 251

95 Ga.App. 715

Roy E. MARTIN et al. v. Mrs. Carlton HENSON.

No. 36644.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.

May 1, 1957.

Rehearing Denied May 17, 1957.

Syllabus by the Court.

The status of invitee involves mutuality of interest. Mutuality of interest required to make one on the premises of another an invitee means that the subject matter of the enterprise must be mutual to the extent that each party is lawfully interested therein, or that there is common interest or mutual advantage involved. An owner of premises must, as to invitees, exercise ordinary care to keep premises safe, not reasonably safe. Where an invitee is injured on premises, as here, the question of negligence, whose negligence and what negligence is for the jury to determine under all the facts and circumstances of the case.

Mrs. Carlton Henson entered suit against Roy E. Martin, Martin Theatres of Georgia, Inc., Martin Theatres of Columbus, Inc. as corporations, and Martin Theatres of Georgia, Inc. and Martin Theatres of Columbus, Inc., doing business as a partnership under the name of Martin Theatres. The petition as amended is as follows:

'1. Defendant, Roy E. Martin, is a resident of 1601 Summit Drive, Columbus, Muscogee County, Georgia.

'2. Defendant, Martin Theatres of Georgia, Inc., is a corporation organized under the laws of Georgia, and having its principal office and place of doing business in Columbus, Muscogee County, Georgia.

'3. Defendant, Martin Theatres of Columbus, Inc., is a corporation organized under the laws of Georgia, and having its principal office and place of doing business in Columbus, Muscogee County, Georgia.

'4. Said defendant, Martin Theatres of Georgia, Inc., and said defendant, Martin Theatres of Columbus, Inc., are the sole members of a general partnership, which partnership does business under the name and style of 'Martin Theatres'. Said partnership herein named as a defendant, has its principal office and place of doing business in Columbus, Muscogee County, Georgia, and is herein referred to as 'Martin Theatres'.

'5. Defendant, Roy E. Martin, is an officer, stockholder and director in Martin Theatres of Georgia, Inc. Defendant, Roy E. Martin, is an officer, stockholder and director in Martin Theatres of Columbus, Inc.'

By amendment the following was added to paragraph 5: 'In all matters herein related he was acting within the scope of his authority and employment as an officer of both of said corporations and as a member of said general partnership, pursuant to and in accordance with the policy and custom of the other defendants in matters of community service, as a part of the good will, advertising and public relations programs of said other defendants, and in furtherance of their slogan: 'Dedicated to Community Service'.'

'6. The said defendants, 'Martin Theatres', Martin Theatres of Georgia, Inc. and Martin Theatres of Columbus, Inc., were, at all times herein related, engaged in the business of distributing and exhibiting motion pictures, to which exhibitions the general public was invited. At all times herein related, said defendants undertook to participate in community affairs in the communities where their motion picture outlets were located, including Columbus, Georgia; undertook, as a part of their regular activities, to perform various tasks of community service without charge or obligation; contributed to various community and public enterprises of a charitable, civic and religious nature; and had as their motto the slogan 'Dedicated to community service'.

'On many and various occasions, and from time to time, said defendants, without charge, have opened their various motion picture theatres and provided places of assembly for numerous events of community interest, other than the exhibition of motion pictures. On many and various occasions, and from time to time, said defendants have planned, sponsored and put on gatherings and entertainments for community service groups, similar to the gathering and entertainment hereinafter described.'

Paragraph 7, as amended, is as follows: 'On the night of September 11, 1954, the defendants planned and intended to entertain the Junior League of Columbus, an organization dedicated to civic and charitable works in Muscogee County, Georgia, at an al fresco party at the home of, and on the grounds of, the defendant, Roy E. Martin. All of the members of the Junior League and their husbands were invited to attend said party, and substantially all of them did attend and participate in said party. The said party was an event of community interest in the City of Columbus, which was planned and put on by the defendant, Roy E. Martin, at his home at 1601 Summit Drive, Columbus, Georgia, and on the grounds appurtenant thereto, by agreement and in conjunction with said defendant, Martin Theatres of Columbus, Inc., said defendant, Martin Theatres of Georgia, Inc., and said defendant, 'Martin Theatres', as a joint enterprise and joint adventure of all of said defendants and for their pecuniary benefit. Defendant, 'Martin Theatres', furnished and provided the entertainment of the evening, which was in the form of motion pictures, and the work of preparing for and putting on the party was performed by employees of the defendant, Roy E. Martin and employees of the defendant, 'Martin Theatres', pursuant to the active direction and supervision of said defendant, Roy E. Martin.

'8. All of the defendants entered into, and were parties to, a plan, agreement, conspiracy and concert of action to do all of the acts herein alleged to be the acts of the defendants, or any of them. All of the acts of the defendants, and of each defendant, were done in furtherance of such agreement, plan, concert of action and conspiracy. All of the defendants had a common design and community of interest in each and every act of each defendant, as herein alleged.

'9. Plaintiff herein, Mrs. Carlton Henson, is the mother of Mrs. Roy E. Martin, the wife of the defendant, Roy E. Martin. At all times herein related, the status of the plaintiff was that of a guest and invitee.'

Paragraph 10, as amended, reads: 'On the aforesaid night of September 11, 1954, plaintiff arrived at the home of the said defendant, Roy E. Martin, some time in advance of the commencement of the party, at the special invitation and request of the said Roy E. Martin and her said daughter for the purpose of assisting in the preparations for the party and assisting her said daughter in dressing for the party.

'11. At or about 7:30 p. m., on said date, and after plaintiff had been present at the home of the said defendant, Roy E. Martin, for some time, and after she had spent some time assisting in the preparations for the party and aiding her said daughter to get dressed for the party, her daughter, the said Mrs. Roy E. Martin, discovered that some of the guests for the party had arrived, parked their automobiles and were walking toward the house. The said Mrs. Roy E. Martin was not dressed, and so could not go out to greet the guests who were arriving earlier than expected. The said Mrs. Martin requested the plaintiff to go down, and on behalf of the said Mrs. Martin, to receive the arriving guests and greet them until such time as the said Mrs. Martin could complete her dressing and come downstairs.

'12. Plaintiff descended the steps from the second floor, where she and the said Mrs. Martin had been, to the first floor and started through the library toward the outside patio, in order to greet said guests.

'13. A part of the floor in the library was covered by a rug or carpet. That part of the floor between the edge of the rug or carpet and the door leading to the outside patio was slick and slippery. The defendants, in preparing for said party, had caused a cloth runner of muslin, or some such similar cloth, to be laid across the said rug or carpet and across the said slick and slippery floor between the rug or carpet and the outside door. The said runner was not nailed or tacked in place, but was loose and subject to be moved without difficulty. It was not possible to approach said outside door from the inside without stepping on said cloth runner.'

By amendment paragraph 14 was revised to read as follows: 'The said servants, employees and agents of the defendants, whose names are not known to the plaintiff, but are well known to the defendants, in preparing for said party, had walked in and out of the house over said cloth runner, and had caused the said runner to become pushed up against the door in such manner that some of the folds of said runner extended between one inch and two inches above the aforesaid slick and slippery floor.'

'15. The door leading from the library to the outside patio was equipped with an unusually strong spring, in order that said door might remain securely fastened at all times, the said home of the defendant, Roy E. Martin, being completely air-conditioned. Said door opened outward, or away from said library, and was particularly difficult to open for the plaintiff, a woman of very little strength, who was then fifty-five years of age.

'16. Just outside said door were two steps leading from the main floor of the library down to the outside stone patio, which lay immediately to the east of said house. Said steps were not provided or equipped with a landing at the head thereof, not were they provided with a hand rail of any sort.

'17. At the time of the fall of the plaintiff, as hereinafter alleged, it was approximately 7:30 p. m., and was dusk, or about halfway between daylight and dark. Inside the library, and on each side of the door leading to the outside, there was an electric lamp, which was lit and which gave forth a bright light. Although said house was provided with an electric light outside, and immediately above, said outside library door, so placed for the express purpose of lighting said outside steps, at all time herein...