Med. Ctr. Hosp. Auth. v. Cavender
Decision Date | 24 March 2015 |
Docket Number | A14A1789,A14A1794.,A14A1790,A14A1792,Nos. A14A1788,A14A1791,A14A1793,s. A14A1788 |
Citation | 771 S.E.2d 153,331 Ga.App. 469 |
Parties | The MEDICAL CENTER HOSPITAL AUTHORITY v. CAVENDER. Securitas Security Services, USA, Inc. v. Cavender. The Medical Center Hospital Authority v. Baker et al. Doctors Hospital, Inc. v. Baker et al. Securitas Security Services, USA, Inc. v. Baker et al. The Medical Center Hospital Authority v. Wright et al. Securitas Security Services, USA, Inc. v. Wright et al. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Andrew Armstrong Rothschild, Jerome M. Rothschild, Columbus, for the Medical Center Hospital Authority.
Charles A. Gower, Ben B. Philips, Columbus, for Alan Keith Cavender.
Lynn M. Roberson, Atlanta, for Securitas Security Services, USA, Inc.
In these interrelated appeals arising from a 2008 triple homicide at Doctors Hospital in Muscogee County, Plaintiffs Alan Keith Cavender, Marion Baker, and Carla Wright (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) brought three separate civil actions against Defendants Doctors Hospital, Inc. d/b/a Doctors Hospital, The Medical Center Hospital Authority, and Securitas Security Services, USA, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”)1 for personal injury (Cavender) and for wrongful death (Baker and Wright).2 The Defendants each filed motions for summary judgment, and following extensive briefing and a hearing, the Superior Court of Muscogee County summarily denied the motions. The trial court granted the Defendants certificates for immediate review, we granted the Defendants' applications for interlocutory appeal, and we have consolidated the appeals for decision. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that the trial court erred in denying the Defendants' motions for summary judgment, and therefore reverse.
Viewed in a light most favorable to the Plaintiffs, the evidence revealed that, for several years, Securitas provided security services to Doctors Hospital pursuant to a security agreement. Securitas provided security guards on three different shifts, including one security guard during the day, to monitor Doctors Hospital. As a part of its service to Doctors Hospital, Securitas also provided annual security surveys to Doctors Hospital. The purpose of the surveys was to “assess the efficiency of the security” at Doctors Hospital. These surveys included areas where improved security may be warranted. In particular, Securitas noted that certain entryways should be secured to control ingress and egress, replacement of the closed-circuit TV monitoring system, and additional coverage of the premises by video cameras.
On February 29, 2008, the Hospital Authority purchased, and took ownership of, the Doctors Hospital campus. On the same date, the Hospital Authority entered into a management agreement with Doctors Hospital, Inc. to manage the day-to-day operations of the hospital. Well prior to the Hospital Authority's acquisition of the hospital, the hospital was required by the Joint Commission on the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations to maintain policies and procedures for, among other things, security. To satisfy its Joint Commission obligation, the prior ownership of Doctors Hospital purchased a “Security Management Policy and Procedure Manual” from Medical Consultants Network, Inc. in the 1990's. Policy 110.015 of the manual included a section defining 18 crimes, both violent and nonviolent, that hospital security “are likely to be called upon to prevent” and “most likely to encounter.” Crimes defined in the policy include assault, battery, manslaughter and murder.
On March 27, 2008, Charles Johnston visited Doctors Hospital carrying two concealed handguns beneath a light jacket. He proceeded to the fifth floor, which housed the hospital's intensive care unit. He then left the hospital for some time and returned on two occasions that day, going to the fifth floor on both occasions. On his third attempt in the early afternoon hours, a nurse asked Johnston if he needed any assistance; he calmly replied that he did not. Johnston then saw Peter Wright enter a room, and Johnston followed him. Johnston asked Wright, “Do you remember me[,] [d]o you remember my mother[,]”3 and Johnston produced one of the concealed handguns and shot Wright at close range. Wright fell to the floor, and Johnston shot him a second time. Wright later died during surgery.
Alan Keith Cavender was on the fifth floor and saw the shooting. Les Harris, hearing the gunshots, ran up the stairwell from the fourth floor to the fifth floor to investigate. Harris asked Cavender to check the stairwell while he monitored the elevators. As the two ran down the hall, Johnston appeared; Johnston shot Harris in the chest, killing him instantly. Cavender attempted to provide CPR to Harris, and Johnston placed his handgun against the back of Cavender's head and cocked the handgun. Cavender told Johnston to “[g]o ahead and shoot me [because] [y]ou just killed my [life] partner.” Instead, Johnston struck Cavender on the back of the head and fled down the stairwell.
Wayne Michaux, the lone Securitas security guard on duty at Doctors Hospital on the day of the shooting, was patrolling the parking lot when he received urgent “code blue,” “code nine”, and “shots fired” calls from Doctors Hospital on his radio. Michaux ran to the emergency room and ordered employees to shut down the ER to prevent anyone from entering or leaving. Someone shouted, “there he is,” and Michaux spotted Johnston. Although Michaux then called 911 to report the shootings, the call center had already received multiple calls concerning Johnston's rampage. Johnston was unable to enter the ER, so he left the hospital and walked to the parking lot. Michaux, though unarmed, followed Johnston through the parking lot and warned visitors in the parking lot to take cover.
James David Baker was parked next to Johnston. As Johnston approached his vehicle, Baker began to exit his vehicle. Johnston shot Baker, and Baker fell back into his vehicle. Law enforcement authorities arrived in the parking lot, and Michaux directed them to Johnston. Johnston exchanged gunfire with the authorities and was himself shot during the incident before he was apprehended. Officers found three handguns on Johnston's person. A medical team from Doctors Hospital reached Baker's vehicle shortly after the shooting but were unable to save Baker's life.
1. In each appeal, the respective Defendants contend that the Plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence that Johnston's attack against Cavender or Johnston's murder of James Baker, Les Harris, and Peter Wright was foreseeable.4 For the following reasons, we agree.
It is well settled that the following four elements are necessary to support a cause of action for negligence under Georgia law:
(1) A legal duty to conform to a standard of conduct raised by the law for the protection of others against unreasonable risk of harm; (2) a breach of this standard; (3) a legally attributable causal connection between the conduct and the resulting injury; and, (4) some loss or damage flowing to the plaintiff's legally protected interest as a result of the alleged breach of the legal duty.
Leech, 289 Ga.App. at 816(1), 658 S.E.2d 637 ; Brown v. All–Tech Investment Group, 265 Ga.App. 889, 893(1), 595 S.E.2d 517 (2003).
In this case, Johnston entered Doctors Hospital with concealed weapons. He proceeded to the fifth floor and targeted Wright, who Johnston believed deliberately caused a decline in his mother's health when she was hospitalized in the Doctors Hospital ICU, resulting in her death. Johnston approached Wright and shot him. Wright fell to the floor and Johnston shot Wright a second time. After shooting Wright, Johnston encountered Cavender and Harris, who had come to the fifth floor to investigate the gunshots. Johnston then shot and killed Harris, struck Cavender5 in the back of the head, and fled the hospital. In the parking lot, Johnston shot and killed Baker as Baker tried to exit his vehicle, which was parked next to Johnston's vehicle. Johnston then exchanged gunfire with law enforcement authorities before he himself was shot and subsequently subdued. In view of Johnston's criminal attacks, the question becomes whether those criminal acts were reasonably foreseeable. See Brown, 265 Ga.App. at 894(1), 900–901, 595 S.E.2d 517.
As a threshold matter, “a property owner is not an insurer of an invitee's safety, and an intervening criminal act by a third party generally insulates a proprietor from liability unless such criminal act was reasonably foreseeable.” Ratliff v. McDonald, 326 Ga.App. 306, 312(2)(a), 756 S.E.2d 569 (2014). See also Days Inns of America v. Matt, 265 Ga. 235, 236, 454 S.E.2d 507 (1995) ; Lau's Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491, 492(1), 405 S.E.2d 474 (1991). “If the proprietor...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Blondell v. Courtney Station 300 LLC
..., 305 Ga. App. 102, 104, 699 S.E.2d 30 (2010) (punctuation omitted and emphasis supplied); accord Med. Ctr. Hosp. Auth. v. Cavender , 331 Ga. App. 469, 473 (1), 771 S.E.2d 153 (2015) ; see Delta Airlines, Inc. v. Townsend , 279 Ga. 511, 515, 614 S.E.2d 745 (2005) ("The requirement of proxim......
-
Goldstein, Garber & Salama, LLC v. J.B.
...Serdula's intervening acts compels a determination that GGS could not reasonably have foreseen them. In Medical Center Hosp. Auth. v. Cavender, 331 Ga.App. 469, 771 S.E.2d 153 (2015), and Brown v. All–Tech Investment Group, 265 Ga.App. 889, 595 S.E.2d 517 (2004), we stressed the unusual nat......
-
George v. Hercules Real Estate Servs., Inc.
...v. Caldwell Elec. Contractors, 280 Ga.App. 267, 276, 633 S.E.2d 646 (2006).4 (Punctuation omitted.) Med. Center Hosp. Auth. v. Cavender, 331 Ga.App. 469, 472 (1), 771 S.E.2d 153 (2015). See also Johns v. Housing Auth. for the City of Douglas, 297 Ga.App. 869, 870–871, 678 S.E.2d 571 (2009).......
-
Shadow v. Fed. Express Corp.
..., may be expected to happen again." (Citation and punctuation omitted; emphasis in original). Med. Center Hosp. Auth. v. Cavender , 331 Ga. App. 469, 475 (1) (a), 771 S.E.2d 153 (2015). Stated another way, "a wrongdoer is not responsible for a consequence which is merely possible, according......
-
Trial Practice and Procedure
...Id. at 652, 760 S.E.2d at 656.37. Id.38. 331 Ga. App. 463, 771 S.E.2d 148 (2015).39. Id. at 467, 771 S.E.2d at 152.40. Id. at 468, 771 S.E.2d at 153.41. 295 Ga. 524, 762 S.E.2d 419 (2014). 42. O.C.G.A. § 9-11-23(a) (2015).43. 295 Ga. at 528, 763 S.E.2d at 423.44. Id. at 524, 762 S.E.2d at 4......