Season All Flower Shop, Inc. v. Rorie

• Decision Date: 15 July 2013
• Docket Number: No. A13A0114.,A13A0114.
• Citation: 323 Ga.App. 529,746 S.E.2d 634
• Parties: SEASON ALL FLOWER SHOP, INC. v. RORIE, et al.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

323 Ga.App. 529

746 S.E.2d 634

SEASON ALL FLOWER SHOP, INC.

v.RORIE, et al.

No. A13A0114.

Court of Appeals of Georgia.

July 15, 2013.

Sean Lombardy Hynes, Marietta, Andrew Alan Curtright, Attorney for Appellant.

M. Khurram Baig, Attorney for Appellee.

PHIPPS, Chief Judge.

We granted an application for interlocutory appeal to review the trial court's denial of a motion for summary judgment filed by Season All Flower Shop, Inc. d/b/a Pristine Chapel Lakeside in this rainy day slip-and-fall action brought by Vera Rorie and her husband Leroy Rorie. The Rories asserted that Vera Rorie was injured when she slipped and fell on the floor while walking in the foyer of the Pristine Chapel.¹ They alleged that Pristine Chapel knew of a hazardous condition on the floor but breached its duty of care to Vera Rorie. After discovery, Pristine Chapel moved for summary judgment. The trial court denied the motion and granted a certificate of immediate review. Because the evidence did not demonstrate that Pristine Chapel exposed Vera Rorie to any unreasonable risk of harm, and Pristine Chapel was entitled to judgment as a matter of law, we reverse.

“A de novo standard of review applies to an appeal from a grant or denial of summary judgment, and we view the evidence, and all reasonable conclusions and inferences drawn from it, in the light most favorable to the nonmovant.” ²

To prevail [at summary judgment], the moving party must demonstrate that there are no genuine issues of any material fact and that the undisputed facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, support judgment as a matter of law. A defendant may do this by showing the court that the documents, affidavits, depositions and other evidence in the record reveal that there is no evidence sufficient to create a jury issue on at least one essential element of plaintiff's case.³

Construed to support the Rories, the evidence showed that the Rories were invited to a wedding at the Pristine Chapel on January 30, 2010, at 3:00 or 4:00 p.m. Leroy Rorie had a prior engagement, so Vera Rorie drove to the Pristine Chapel alone. Vera Rorie, who was deposed, described the weather conditions that day: “it was raining, sleeting, and snowing.” She wore a dress, an overcoat, and pump-style shoes with a two-inch heel.

After Vera Rorie arrived at the Pristine Chapel, she sat in her vehicle for “maybe 15 minutes.” Vera Rorie affirmed that it was still raining, sleeting, and snowing as she walked inside the building, using an umbrella, and that the ground was wet. She described what next occurred, as follows:

So when I arrived at the chapel, there was a line in front of the door to get into the wedding. And I got in that line. And when I arrived inside the foyer, there was a round table. And that table had been placed in front of the doors so that when you walked into the chapel, the guests would sign the guestbook. And so I stood in that line and signed the guestbook and then I proceeded to go into the chapel. So I walked around the table from where I was standing. I then moved to my left to walk around the table. And as I got around to the side of the table, one of the ushers asked if I was there for the bride or the groom. And I said I was there for the groom. And then he directed me to the right door to go in on that side. And so I started to walk to the right door and slipped and fell.

She testified, “they purposely put the table there so you would have to sign in and you get directed either to the bride's side or the groom's side.” Vera Rorie further testified that there were no floor mats or caution signs in the area in which she fell, and that after she fell she remained on the floor—close to the guest book table, where she fell—until paramedics arrived.

Vera Rorie testified that the distance from the entrance door of the building to the guest book table was approximately two feet, and that she had traversed that distance without sliding. When asked whether she felt anythingslippery as she walked from the guest book table to the usher, Vera Rorie testified, “I did not slide until I fell.” Vera Rorie testified that when she fell, she still had on her overcoat. She surmised that she had left her umbrella near the guest book table because she was not holding it when she fell; she was certain, however, that she did not leave the umbrella outside the building before she entered.

Vera Rorie was not in the first group of guests to arrive at the wedding. She testified that when she arrived, approximately 30 minutes before the wedding was scheduled to begin, “there were [already] people in the chapel sitting,” and that there were bridesmaids and groomsmen in the foyer. Vera Rorie recognized that other people had entered the building from outside, where it was wet, before she entered the building. She further testified that “there were guests coming in [the foyer] before me and after me, and they were going through the same process of going to the one door or the other,” and that “[a]bsolutely nothing” obstructed her view of the floor after the usher had directed her to the right-side door of the chapel. As to what made her slip and fall, the following colloquy is relevant:

Q. What caused to you [sic] slip and fall on the floor?

A. What caused me to slip and fall on the floor?

Q. Yes.

A. I don't know how to answer that. A slippery floor.

Q. What made the floor slippery?

A. The moisture from the rain, sleet, and snow.

Q. And you're sure that you slipped in some moisture?

A. I am positive I slipped in moisture.

Q. And how are you positive of that?

A. My clothes were wet. When they got me up off the floor, my clothes were soaking wet.

Q. So are you saying that there was like a puddle of water on the floor?

A. No, I am not. I am saying that when they got me up off the floor, my clothes were wet. The way that I know that, when they started to take me out to the ambulance, it was so cold outside. They had taken my coat off, and the wet clothes just clinged to me. I realized that my velour part of my dress was wet, very wet. And I had on a coat so I could not have gotten any wetness coming inside. I had on a coat. I was covered. So the moisture or the wetness that was in my dress came from being on the floor.

Q. Where was the moisture on the floor that you slipped in?

[Attorney representing the Rories]: Object to form. You can answer, if you understand the question.

By [Attorney representing Pristine Chapel]:

Q. Where in the room was it?

A. I don't know how to answer the question that says where is the moisture. I'm sorry. I don't know how to answer that question.

Q. You said that you slipped on some moisture that was on the floor, right; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Where was that moisture in the lobby?

A. I don't know how to answer that.

Q. In relation to other things in the room, doorways, tables, where was the moisture that you slipped on?

A. Sir, I don't know how to answer that. The way I know there was moisture there was my clothes were wet. And, you know, I had slipped, I fell, and my clothes were wet.

Vera Rorie testified that the moisture on the floor was not visible to the “naked eye.” And other than saying there was moisture on the floor, she was unable to provide any further description of the moisture that she claimed caused her to fall. As to the lighting conditions, she testified that it was daytime and that the foyer was “well lit.”

One of the owners of the Pristine Chapel deposed that her staff had followed the company's rainy day procedures and laid down mats appropriately and put out caution signs in the foyer that day. The owner did not attend the wedding, however. Her testimonywas purportedly based on photographs of the wedding which depicted mats on the floor and a caution sign in the foyer; but the referenced photographs were not introduced as exhibits during the owner's deposition. During Vera Rorie's deposition, she was unable to authenticate pictures of the wedding, purportedly showing a mat and a caution sign on the floor of the foyer.

In denying Pristine Chapel's motion for summary judgment, the trial court concluded that there remained a genuine issue of material fact “as [to] [w]hether or not there was an ‘unusual accumulation’ of water on the floor upon which [Vera Rorie] slipped and fell, in an area inside the location that a reasonable person would not expect water to accumulate.” The trial court found:

[Vera Rorie] testified in her deposition ... that she walked into Defendant's premises about 10 steps, signed a guest book on a table specifically set up for guests, turned, and fell. She did not see a puddle of water, but her skirt was soaking wet after she was put into the ambulance after the fall. There is therefore, at least circumstantial evidence that there was an ‘unusual accumulation’ of water in the area where [Vera Rorie] fell.

The trial court also concluded that a genuine issue of material fact remained as to Pristine Chapel's “knowledge of a hazard, or [Pristine Chapel]'s actions to inspect and prevent an unusual accumulation of water.”

1. Pristine Chapel contends that the trial court erred in denying its motion for summary judgment because there was no evidence that Vera Rorie slipped and fell in an area where there had been an unusual accumulation of water. We agree.

“Although an owner or occupier of land has a statutory duty to keep its approaches and premises in a reasonably safe condition for invitees ... an owner or occupier of land is not an insurer of the safety of its invitees.” ⁴ “In premises liability cases, proof of a fall, without more, does not give rise to liability on the part of a proprietor, because the true basis of a proprietor's liability for personal injury to an invitee is the proprietor's superior knowledge of a condition that may expose the invitee to an unreasonable risk of harm.” ⁵

“[I]n order to recover for injuries sustained in a slip-and-fall action, an invitee must prove (1) that the...