Muse v. Ozment
Decision Date | 08 January 1980 |
Docket Number | No. 58664,58664 |
Parties | MUSE et al. v. OZMENT. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Robert W. Steinbruegge, William D. Sparks, Rome, for appellants.
J. Clinton Sumner, Jr., Raymond H. Cox, Rome, for appellee.
The appellants in this case are Robyn Muse and her mother, Bobbie Muse. The litigation below arose out of an unfortunate incident occurring at a family gathering. Four-year-old Robyn, her mother and other relatives were guests at the home of the defendant-appellee who is Robyn's uncle and Bobbie's brother. After dinner, the men retired to the living room and the ladies to the patio. Robyn and her nine-year-old cousin, appellee's son, went into the backyard to play. Her cousin obtained a golf club from an unlocked storage building behind the house. When her cousin took a swing with the golf club, Robyn, who was standing behind, was struck in the forehead. Robyn, by her mother as next friend, filed suit against appellee and his son. She alleged that her cousin had negligently wielded and swung the golf club so as to strike her. The allegations against appellee were that he "was negligent in not exercising control of (his son, appellant's cousin), and allowing him to wield this potentially dangerous instrument." It was further alleged that appellee knew that his son "was unskilled and unfamiliar with the use of adult golf clubs . . . and failed to properly instruct (his son) in safety procedures regarding its use." Robyn Muse sought $150,000 in damages. Robyn's mother filed a simultaneous action against her nephew and appellee, her brother, alleging the same acts of negligence against them as had her daughter's complaint. Robyn's mother sought to recover Robyn's medical expenses and $50,000 in damages.
After discovery, appellee, as a defending party, moved for summary judgment in each civil action. Appellee's motion was granted, leaving his minor son as the sole defendant in each case. Robyn and her mother appeal from this grant of summary judgment which had the effect of dismissing each appellant's case against appellee.
" Corley v. Lewless, 227 Ga. 745, 747, 182 S.E.2d 766 (1971).
The evidence in the instant case shows merely that appellee had stored, in an unlocked outbuilding, a golf club. His son, acting without direction and without appellee's knowledge, obtained the club from its place of storage and began to play with it. While playing with the club, appellee's son struck and injured Robyn. These facts demonstrate no...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sowell v. Solomon
...a BB gun, and there was no evidence that the child had any proclivity or propensity for playing with it); Muse v. Ozment , 152 Ga. App. 896, 898-899, 264 S.E.2d 328 (1980) (the father was entitled to summary judgment where the evidence showed he did not know of any proclivity of the son for......
-
Boston v. Athearn
...known to the former and no reason to anticipate the injury which in fact occurred.”) (citations omitted); Muse v. Ozment, 152 Ga.App. 896, 898, 264 S.E.2d 328 (1980) (Recovery is not permitted against a parent for a child's tort “[w]here [the] parent has no special reason to anticipate” tha......
-
Manuel v. Koonce
...of the child and whether, if so, [the parent] exercised the proper degree of care to guard against this result. Muse v. Ozment, 152 Ga.App. 896 (264 SE2d 328) (1980)." Hill v. Morrison, 160 Ga.App. 151 (286 SE2d 467). In the case sub judice, the majority holds that no genuine issue of mater......
-
Mayer v. Self
...another through the child's use of the instrumentality." Corley v. Lewless, 227 Ga. 745, 748, 182 S.E.2d 766. See also Muse v. Ozment, 152 Ga.App. 896, 264 S.E.2d 328; Poythress v. Walls, 151 Ga.App. 176, 259 S.E.2d 177; and Hulsey v. Hightower, 44 Ga.App. 455 (3), 161 S.E. Defendants argue......