Olsen v. Robinson

• Decision Date: 18 June 1973
• Parties: Olaf OLSEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Floyd ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellee.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

Page 462

496 S.W.2d 462

Olaf OLSEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Floyd ROBINSON, Defendant-Appellee.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

June 18, 1973.

Joe H. Walker, Harriman, for plaintiff-appellant.

Howard F. Jarvis, Knoxville, for defendant-appellee.

OPINION

JOHN W. WILSON, Special Justice.

The parties will be designated as in the trial court; that is, Olaf Olsen as plaintiff and Floyd Robinson as defendant.

The plaintiff brought this action on May 10, 1972, seeking to recover damages for personal injuries sustained on May 11, 1971. It is averred that while a guest at the home or farm of defendant in Morgan County, Tennessee, the plaintiff was requested by the defendant to feed and care for defendant's chickens located in a chicken house some distance from the dwelling of the defendant, and while traversing a flagstone walk which contained several puddles of water, he stepped into a hidden depression which caused him to fall to the ground, generally bruising him and injuring his ankle. He averred permanent injuries.

We copy from the declaration filed by the plaintiff as follows:

'3. Plaintiff avers that the defendant did or should have known of the dangerous condition that existed along the walkway of the defendant's home to the chicken house and the defendant was under an obligation to warn the plaintiff of any hidden hazards and defendants failure to do so constituted negligence. The plaintiff avers that he is without negligence whatsoever.'

On July 3, 1970, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, in the following language:

'The defendant moves the Court to dismiss the action because the complaint fails to state a claim against defendant upon which relief can be granted, in that the complaint fails to state facts, or fails to allege facts that defendant was guilty of gross negligence, or set a 'trap' for plaintiff. At the most, defendant, under the allegations contained in the complaint, could only be guilty of ordinary negligence which will not sustain a recovery in a suit by a guest against a host under the Uniform Decisions of the Appellate Court and the Supreme Court of Tennessee.'

The motion to dismiss was heard on the 16th day of October, 1972, and the Circuit Judge, being of the opinion that the motion was well taken, dismissed the action, the order of dismissal being entered November 1, 1972. The plaintiff excepted to the action of the Court in dismissing the action, prayed and was granted an appeal to this Court.

The only assignment of error is the action of the trial court in sustaining the motion to dismiss the complaint.

The brief of both parties and the authorities therein discussed proceed upon the assumption the plaintiff was a social guest.

In the complaint the plaintiff fixed his status as that of a guest at the home or the farm of defendant, and we think the case is controlled by the case of Walker v. Williams, 215 Tenn. 195, 384 S.W.2d 447 (1964), which holds that a social guest at a home is not in law an invitee, but a licensee to whom the owner owes no...