O'Steen v. Rheem Mfg. Co., s. A89A1740
Decision Date | 03 January 1990 |
Docket Number | Nos. A89A1740,A89A1741,s. A89A1740 |
Citation | 390 S.E.2d 248,194 Ga.App. 240 |
Parties | O'STEEN v. RHEEM MANUFACTURING COMPANY. RHEEM MANUFACTURING CO. v. O'STEEN. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Reynolds & McArthur, Charles M. Cork III, O. Wendell Horne, III, Macon, for appellant.
Jones, Cork & Miller, Carr G. Dodson, Bradley J. Survant, Macon, for appellee.
On April 4, 1985, Ms. O'Steen, appellant in Case No. A89A1740, was driving along the roadway which traversed the parking lot owned by, and located adjacent to the plant of, her employer, appellee/cross-appellant Rheem Manufacturing Company (Rheem). As she approached a side road (also within the parking lot), a car driven by a fellow employee (not a party to the instant appeal) entered the road on which she was travelling and collided with her vehicle. In December 1986, after her workers' compensation claim was denied under the "lunch break" rule, Ms. O'Steen brought an action against Rheem and the driver of the other vehicle, alleging against the latter negligence in failing to keep a proper lookout, failure to yield to a vehicle on his right, and failure to maintain control of his vehicle; and against Rheem, negligence in permitting large trucks to be parked where they blocked the view of the intersection and failing to post traffic signs and markers to indicate right-of-way, etc. Rheem unsuccessfully moved for summary judgment, arguing primarily that O'Steen, having worked at the site for more than six years and having passed through the intersection in question more than 5,000 times, had knowledge of the purported hazard equal to or greater than that of her employer. In January 1987, before the case actually went to trial, O'Steen suffered a job-related injury, and damages for this injury were also sought in conjunction with the 1985 incident.
Upon trial, a Fulton County jury awarded O'Steen damages of $217,587. The trial court granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict in favor of Rheem, and both parties appeal. In Case No. A89A1740 Ms. O'Steen enumerates seven errors having to do with the "equal knowledge rule," both facially and in its application to the instant case, alleging that the "equal knowledge rule" should have barred the award of judgment n.o.v. In Case No. A89A1741, Rheem enumerates as error the trial court's denial of its motion for directed verdict (made at the close of plaintiff O'Steen's case) on the ground that the Workers' Compensation Act barred plaintiff's recovery of damages for expenses incurred on or after January 15, 1987; and the subsequent granting of a directed verdict against Rheem on that issue. Rheem also enumerates as error the trial court's failure to give seven jury instructions it had requested. Held:
1. Chiefly at issue in the instant case is the applicability vel non of the "superior/equal knowledge rule." Rheem argues that this rule absolves the company of liability, inasmuch as O'Steen had passed through the crucial intersection at least 5,000 times during the course of her employment and therefore was well aware of any potential hazard that might have existed. O'Steen, on the other hand, argues that the rule should be abolished or held inapplicable to the instant cases.
In Clark v. Carla Gay Dress Co., 178 Ga.App. 157, 342 S.E.2d 468 (1986), the "superior/equal knowledge rule" was invoked as a defense against an employee's allegation that the employer had been negligent in allowing on the business premises her apparently mild-mannered estranged husband, who suddenly pulled a gun and shot her. Although so different factually from the instant cases as not to be apposite in its particulars, Carla Gay nevertheless incorporates so comprehensive and well-reasoned an analysis of the "superior/equal knowledge rule" that it serves well to point the way to the proper disposition of the cases at bar. We quote at length from pages 158-160, 342 S.E.2d 468:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Valdosta State Univ. v. Davis
...Williams , 344 Ga. App. at 315 (1), 809 S.E.2d 839 ; Ward , 281 Ga. App. at 879 (2) (a), 637 S.E.2d 483.12 O'Steen v. Rheem Mfg. Co. , 194 Ga. App. 240, 242 (1), 390 S.E.2d 248 (1990) (citation and punctuation omitted); see Weston v. Dun Transp. , 304 Ga. App. 84, 87 (1), 695 S.E.2d 279 (20......
-
Barnes v. Morganton Baptist Ass'n Inc.Barnes v. Tankersley
...he could have avoided the consequences of defendant's negligence. OCGA § 51–11–7.” (Punctuation omitted.) O'Steen v. Rheem Mfg. Co., 194 Ga.App. 240, 242(1), 390 S.E.2d 248 (1990). Plaintiffs argue that there nevertheless remain issues of fact as to whether Lackhouse was exercising reasonab......
-
Cherokee Main St., LLC v. Ragan. TJX Cos.
...Court addressed the application of the superior/equal knowledge rule in a case involving a similar claim in O'Steen v. Rheem Mfg. Co. , 194 Ga. App. 240, 240, 390 S.E.2d 248 (1990). There, O’Steen, the plaintiff, worked for the defendant company and was driving through the company’s parking......
-
Keith v. Beard
...principle from premises liability law did apply, the facts do not support Beard's argument. Beard relies on O'Steen v. Rheem Mfg. Co., 194 Ga.App. 240, 242(1), 390 S.E.2d 248 (1990) where the intersection at issue did not involve a public road and no breach of a landowner's duty was alleged......