Robert & Co. Associates v. Tigner

• Decision Date: 14 October 1986
• Docket Number: No. 72921,72921
• Citation: 351 S.E.2d 82,180 Ga.App. 836
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals
• Parties: ROBERT & COMPANY ASSOCIATES v. TIGNER et al.

Page 82

351 S.E.2d 82

180 Ga.App. 836

ROBERT & COMPANY ASSOCIATES v.TIGNER et al.

No. 72921.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Oct. 14, 1986.

Rehearing Denied Nov. 17, 1986.

Kent T. Stair, Alan B. Kyman and Douglas A. Wilde, Atlanta, for appellant.

William C. Lanham, Clark H. McGehee, Gary L. Seacrest, Thomas S. Bentley, Edwin A. Tate II, A. Terry Sorrells, David D. Blum and Marva Jones Brooks, Atlanta, for appellees.

BIRDSONG, Presiding Judge.

Tort Liability.This multiple-day trial involves numerous parties and a voluminous record and transcript (over 3,500 pages).Considering those facts necessary to the disposition of the issues, we conclude the jury was warranted in believing the following.In approximately 1979, the City of Atlanta determined to expand the facilities at Hartsfield International Airport.In addition to the mid-terminal, the city leased certain property to the airlines for their personal and exclusive use as parking areas for airline employees.Eastern Airlines represented the airlines as the lessee-owner for the construction of the parking lots.Eastern entered into contract with a joint venture of design engineers Robert & Co. Assoc., Howard, Needles, Tammen and Bergendoff, Williams, Russell & Assoc.(hereinafter "Robert & Co.").Robert & Co. was charged with the responsibility to design the roadways, parking ramps for aircraft, landing strips, buildings, etc.The general contractor to construct the airport facilities in accordance with Robert & Co. designs was also a joint venture, Wright, Claussen, Matthews, MacDougald-Warren (hereinafter "Wright Claussen").Wright Claussen subcontracted the roadway stripping and marking with Peek Pavement Marking, Inc.(hereinafter "Peek").

The locale giving rise to this litigation involves the roadway leading to the private parking lots designed by Robert & Co., constructed by Wright Claussen and painted by Peek.The roadway leading to the parking area was intended for the use of airline employees but was not closed to the general public.As originally designed and intended by Eastern, the roadway was a four-lane road with a median strip that was to go from adjacent highways leading to the airport past the parking areas but leading to and from the mid-terminal.It was intended that the southbound lanes would not only pass the parking areas but would proceed to a ramp leading to I-85 primarily for the benefit of the airline employees leaving the airline parking lots.

Ultimately, the Department of Transportation(DOT) declined permission to connect the southbound lanes to I-85.As a result the southbound lanes proceeded from an adjoining highway onto the airport property to a point adjacent to the airline parking area.Instead of proceeding further to the south, the two lanes merged into one and came to a deadend adjacent to the entrance to the Eastern parking lot.Robert & Co. designed the southbound lanes so as to force southbound traffic to move to the right lane and at the end of the southbound road make a 90 degree left turn.The design called for the word "STOP" to be painted on the surface of the roadway in letters eight feet high and seven feet nine inches wide.Immediately above the word "STOP" the design called for a stop bar.The purpose of the "STOP" and stop bar was to direct traffic proceeding south to come to the end of the southbound lanes, make a 90 degree turn and stop before entering the two northbound lanes going past the entrance to the Eastern parking lot and, further to the north, the entrance to the Delta parking lot and other airline parking lots.

The designs prepared by Robert & Co. clearly show the intent for the word "STOP" and stop bar to be painted at the intersection.For unknown reasons, even though the subcontractor Peek painted the hash marks on the left lane back toward the north from the intersection in the southbound lane, thus forcing the traffic to the right lane, it did not paint the word "STOP" nor the stop bar in the median at the intersection.After Peek had completed its work painting the roadway markings, it requested the general contractor Wright Claussen and the design engineer Robert & Co.(and the City of Atlanta) to make the final inspection and prepare the punch list preparatory to delivery and acceptance of the work by the employer, Eastern.In spite of the clear direction that the word "STOP" and stop bar be painted on the surface of the pavement at the intersection, neither Peek, Wright Claussen nor Robert & Co. noticed the deficiency of the word "STOP" or stop bar.Numerous witnesses testified that the most logical explanation was that the painting simply inadvertently was omitted and that omission never detected by the several parties including the owner Eastern.Also testimony was offered and unrebutted that the intersection was designed in accordance with a technical manual recognized by all the parties as being expositive of the traffic safety requirements involving this and similar intersections.That manual suggested that for the intersection to be safe up to the standards of the manual, in addition to the word "STOP" and the stop bar there should have been a sign to the north of the intersection stating "STOP AHEAD" to alert the approaching motorists that there was indeed a stop.This was because a person coming to the intersection and making the 90 degree left turn would, upon approaching, see the word "STOP" and stop bar at an angle to the left until the turn was actually made to enter the parking lot across the northbound lanes or to make a U-turn to proceed back north in the northbound lanes.

In addition to the omission of the word "STOP" and the stop bar, the jury could have concluded that automobiles proceeding northward at a rate of speed of 40-50 mph would not be visible to a vehicle making the left turn from the southbound lanes across the northbound lanes into the parking lot.This was due to a curve in the northbound lanes to the south of the intersection and also to the wire mesh fences circumscribing the parking lots.The jury would also have been warranted in concluding that the design of the intersection was incomplete and unnecessarily dangerous because of the omission of the word "STOP AHEAD" or some stop sign in addition to the word "STOP" and stop bar painted on the pavement as well as because of the obscured vision caused by the fense and turn in the road.

The intersection and parking lot had been surrendered to Eastern and accepted by Eastern in 1980.The parking lot had been used daily during that two-year period.In early July 1982, James Tigner sought and obtained employment with Eastern airlines as a ramp employee.Tigner offered evidence that for approximately 30 years, he had been a musician, arranging, composing and playing with and for various groups throughout the country.During these years, he worked for various employers, all of which, he said, paid him in cash without the use of W-2 forms or regular salaries.As a result, Tigner could not and did not offer any testimony as to his wages or earnings during this 30-year period.He also candidly admitted that because he was paid in cash and had never had a W-2 pertaining to himself he had not filed income tax returns.Because he had been traveling as a musician so much during these years, he determined that he wanted to spend more quality time with his family; therefore, in 1982, he returned to Atlanta to take steady employment which he secured with Eastern.The evidence shows that he was to be a summer replacement for three months and he agreed in advance that he would be discharged at the end of the summer but with the possibility that he would be retained or rehired at the termination of the summer employment.His contracted wage was $358 per week, or approximately $15,000 per year.It is noted that throughout his musical travels his wife also worked and contributed towards the support of the family.

Tigner was scheduled to report for his first day of work with Eastern on the morning of July 9, 1982.He was given instructions to proceed from his home to Riverdale Road and enter the airport area on the two southbound lanes leading to the Eastern parking lot and to find a parking space in that lot.He would then be taken as all other employees were to the Eastern facilities by buses.

Tigner followed these directions and testified that he proceeded on a motorcycle south on the southbound two lanes.He noted the hash marks and obeyed them, driving to the right side until he came to the end of the road.He slowed, made the left turn, and inasmuch as there was no direction whether to stop or proceed, he proceeded directly across the two northbound lanes toward the guard shack at the entrance to the Eastern parking lot.He saw no oncoming traffic on the northbound lanes.In fact, there were two automobiles proceeding north on the northbound lanes approaching the intersection.The first automobile was operated by one Malone.There was a dispute as to his actual speed, there being estimates in the range from 25-50 mph.Malone testified that he never saw a motorcycle until after Tigner was on the hood of the automobile sliding up over the automobile windshield.The collision between Malone's automobile and the motorcycle caused Tigner to be thrown approximately 85 feet.There seems to be little dispute that he suffered serious fractures to his right hip, his right thigh and his left ankle.Two years after the accident (at the time of suit), Tigner still suffered constant pain and was required to walk with crutches.There was evidence which could establish to the jury's satisfaction that Tigner also suffered personality changes and loss of mental acuity.As a result of this accident, Tigner brought suit against the City of Atlanta as the owner of the property, contending that the City did not properly inspect the intersection for safety and allowed a nuisance to continue because of the dangerous...