Shiells v. Kolt
| Decision Date | 18 February 1986 |
| Docket Number | CA-CIV,No. 2,2 |
| Citation | 148 Ariz. 424,714 P.2d 1319 |
| Parties | William N. SHIELLS, a single man, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. R.F. KOLT and Donald W. Kolt, Oracle Wetmore Carwash, an Arizona partnership, Defendants/Appellees. 5500. |
| Court | Arizona Court of Appeals |
This appeal is from a summary judgment dismissing appellant's personal injury complaint.
The appellant drove to a carwash owned and/or operated by the appellees to buy gasoline. Upon exiting the cashier's office, he vaulted over a two and one-half-foot to three-foot railing along a walkway in front of the office. The railing collapsed and he was injured. The railing, which was made of steel pipe and anchored to the walkway, had previously been damaged by an automobile and one or more of the vertical rails to the anchors was loose. This condition was not obvious to anyone, and the appellant was not aware of it. The purpose of the railing was to provide a safe route to the cashier's office from the gas pumps by separating the walkway from the driveway. In order to get to the cashier, one had to walk around the open end of the rail into the walkway. The appellant had used that route on his way to the office to pay for his gas, but chose a "shortcut" upon his exit.
The appellees contend that this appeal is controlled by the decision of our supreme court in Nicoletti v. Westcor, Inc., 131 Ariz. 140, 639 P.2d 330 (1982). In Nicoletti, the court affirmed summary dismissal of an injured department store employee's complaint. The employee had attempted a shortcut across the property through a planter instead of using the sidewalk. She had tripped on either a wire or the vines in the planter. The court found that her status as an invitee had changed to that of a licensee or trespasser because she had engaged in an unpermitted activity or gone beyond the area to which she was invited. The opinion relied on Southwest Cotton Co. v. Pope, 25 Ariz. 364, 218 P. 152 (1923), in which the plaintiff, a salesman, in an effort to do business with the defendant, went inside a seedhouse to talk to the cotton company foreman. The foreman was busy at the time feeding a conveyor, part of which, including the seed auger, was covered from plaintiff's view. The injury occurred when the plaintiff's foot was caught in the auger. The court held that, by going to the seedhouse in search of the foreman, the plaintiff had exceeded the scope of his invitation and had become a licensee and that the defendant owed him no duty as to the premises except to not knowingly let him be injured by hidden peril or intentionally cause him harm.
Clearly, this earlier decision...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Woodty v. Weston's Lamplighter Motels
...unpermitted activities or goes beyond the area to which he or she is invited." 131 Ariz. at 143, 639 P.2d at 333. In Shiells v. Kolt, 148 Ariz. 424, 714 P.2d 1319 (App.1986), an appeal from summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff's personal injury complaint, the court held that the defend......
-
Skoglund v. Neste Dev. Nev., L.L.C.
...of fact are strictly within the purview of thefinder of fact and not the trial court.1¶15 Gold argues Nicoletti and Shiells v. Kolt, 148 Ariz. 424, 714 P.2d 1319 (App. 1986) are persuasive. However, we are not persuaded by Gold's reliance on these authorities.¶16 In Nicoletti, an employee o......
-
Mauvis v. Scottsdale Christian Acad., Inc.
...knew or should have known visitors would use the curb cuts as an unmarked crosswalk to reach its campus.¶14 SCA also cites Shiells v. Kolt, 148 Ariz. 424 (App. 1986). There, a previously damaged railing along a walkway in front of the defendants' office collapsed when the plaintiff attempte......