Stricklin v. Stefani

Decision Date17 December 2018
Docket Number3:17-cv-00397-RJC-DCK
CourtU.S. District Court — Western District of North Carolina
Parties Lisa Keri STRICKLIN, Plaintiff, v. Gwen STEFANI and Live Nation Entertainment, Inc., Defendants.

Larry Economos, Raleigh, NC, for Plaintiff.

Robert Reed Marcus, Bridget Villacorta Warren, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, Charlotte, NC, for Defendants.

ORDER

Robert J. Conrad, Jr., United States District Judge

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the following: (1) Defendant Gwen Stefani's Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support, (Doc. No. 40); (2) Defendant Live Nation's Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum in Support, (Doc. Nos. 38, 39); (3) Plaintiff's Responsive Briefing in Opposition, (Doc. Nos. 59, 60); (4) Defendants' Replies (Doc. Nos. 65, 68); and the Supplemental Briefing and supporting exhibits, (Doc. Nos. 75–77), allowed pursuant to the Court's Order dated December 4, 2018, (Doc. No. 74). Also before the Court is Defendant Live Nation's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and Memorandum in Support, (Doc. Nos. 25, 26); Plaintiff's Responsive Briefing in Opposition, (Doc. No. 30); and Defendant Live Nation's Reply, (Doc. No. 31).

I. BACKGROUND
I know I've been a real bad girl (I'll try to change) I didn't mean for you to get hurt whatsoever1

This case is about whether a performer ("Gwen Stefani" or "Defendant Stefani") and the company who booked the performer and oversaw the performance ("Live Nation" or "Defendant Live Nation") should be held liable for a concert patron's ("Plaintiff") personal injuries after the performer invited patrons to move toward the stage, prompting an alleged "stampede crowd rush." (Doc. No. 13 ¶ 24(a) ). The record establishes, the parties agree, and/or the parties do not dispute the following.

A. Stefani's Invitation and Plaintiff's Injury

On July 23, 2016, Plaintiff attended a Gwen Stefani concert at PNC Music Pavilion in Charlotte, North Carolina, a venue owned and operated by Live Nation Worldwide, Inc. ("Live Nation").2 (Doc. No. 13 ¶¶ 7, 10). Live Nation booked singer Gwen Stefani to perform at PNC Pavilion. (Id. ¶ 10). PNC Pavilion has two main seating options for attending patrons. (Id. ¶ 8). There are approximately 8,614 reserved theatre-style seats ("reserved area") closer to the performance stage and approximately 10,154 available spaces in the lawn seating area farther from the stage ("lawn"). (Id. ). Plaintiff purchased a ticket in the reserved seating area, specifically in section 7, row v, seat 20 and attended the concert with a group of her friends. (Id. ¶¶ 11–12). Defendant Stefani entered an annotated diagram of the venue into evidence, which the Court incorporates below:

(Doc. No. 40-3: Diagram of PNC Pavilion).

Twenty minutes into Stefani's performance, Stefani invited patrons to move closer to the performance stage:

I'm just going to tell you something. I'm just going to talk to the security guards for one second. If anyone wants to come down a little closer so I can see you a little better, just come on down, I don't think anyone's going to care, like just fill it in and like and you know, who cares about your lawn chairs, you can get new ones."

(Doc. No. 40-4 at 2).

Following this announcement, a crowd of lawn patrons moved through the reserved area and climbed over chairs and railings to get closer to the performance stage. (Id. ). Plaintiff claims that, at this juncture, she was terrified as she saw the crowd moving forward behind her. (Doc. No. 59 at 2). She alleges that, in an attempt to escape the danger, she left her seat, moved left toward the aisle, and tried to move in the opposite direction of the stage to try and "get out." (Id. ). Plaintiff asserts she could not get out because "she was being pushed by the crowd rushing toward the stage, and feeling "hydroplaned," was then trampled and forcibly pushed into a wall. (Id. ). She ended up injured on the ground "at the top of section 2 close to the VIP barricades." (Doc. No. 39 at 4). Plaintiff's injury occurred approximately five minutes after Stefani's initial announcement. (Id. ). Paramedics transported Plaintiff to the hospital where she was diagnosed with a lateral tibial plateau fracture

to her left leg. (Doc. No. 13 ¶ 18). Plaintiff underwent surgery approximately two weeks later. (Doc. No. 40-1 at 3).

B. Live Nation's Response and Stefani's Retraction

Live Nation employed security personnel to staff Stefani's performance and supplied security barriers at certain locations to manage crowd control. (Doc. No. 13 ¶ 14). Live Nation has placed various physical barricades in the venue to block off the lawn section from the reserved section. (Doc. No. 39 at 5). These barricades include a concrete wall extending around the perimeter of the upper reserved area, railings separating the lawn area from the upper reserved area, and bicycle racks positioned throughout the venue at the tops of the sections where guest services employees are stationed. (Doc. No. 39-11 at 15–16, 24–25).

Live Nation staffed the Stefani concert with over thirty ushers assigned to various seating sections at the Pavilion, fifty-two total civilian security personnel, and twenty-seven off-duty police officers deployed in and around the venue. (Doc. No. 39 at 5). Nevertheless, Plaintiff and Plaintiff's friends claim that they saw very few Live Nation security personnel during the alleged stampede and heard no safety instructions from security personnel. Plaintiff asserts she saw only one possible security individual during the crowd rush when patrons were jumping over seats and moving forward. (Doc. No. 59 at 2).

Live Nation held a security briefing for security personnel prior to the concert. (Doc. No. 39 at 5). At this briefing, security personnel did not specifically discuss what to do in an event of a crowd rush to protect patrons. (Doc. No. 60 at 6). Charles Singley, a guest services supervisor for Live Nation, testified that Live Nation has a general protocol for when a few patrons (i.e., one to five) attempt to move out of their designated ticket area and toward the stage: "we try and hold the line ... fast where [they] have the controlled entrances into the sections" and prevent the few patrons from moving forward (Doc. No. 59-7 at 6–7; Doc. No. 39-11 at 25). But Singley noted that a different procedure applies when there are many people rushing the stage:

However, if it's a massive group of people or more than what would be expected for them to handle, my first concern is their safety, and I typically will instruct them to open that bicycle rack up completely. That way the guests aren't having to climb over the rails so they themselves won't get injured and for them to step up behind the concrete wall.

(Doc. No. 39-11 at 26; see also Doc. No. 59-7 at 7). In the instant case, at least one security agent followed this procedure in response to the numerous lawn patrons rushing toward the stage after Stefani's invitation. (See Doc. No. 59 at 4). In fact, one of Plaintiff's friends testified that she saw "one security agent remove a barrier to allow the rush to flow into the reserved sitting area." (Id. ).

According to Defendant Live Nation, when Stefani initially invited patrons to move toward the stage, Live Nation's Operations Manager Mac Goodrum, who was located in the lawn seating area, "rushed" to the reserved seating area and notified the Live Nation General Manager Peter O'Donnell, via two-way radio, of Stefani's announcement. (Doc. No. 39 at 6). When Goodrum arrived in the reserved seating area he instructed ushers "to not let anybody through." (Id. ). Goodrum also claims that he tried to stop the patrons who were trying to climb rails and attempted to redirect the ones who had already climbed over. (Id. ).

After receiving the radio call from Goodrum, O'Donnell, who was backstage at the time and near Stefani's tour manager Brian Cross, informed Cross of the issue and instructed Cross to tell Stefani to retract her invitation and tell patrons to return to their ticketed areas. (Id.; Doc. No. 60 at 8). In turn, Stefani's tour manager communicated with Stefani, who at that point, rescinded the invitation to the crowd about ten minutes after her initial invitation:

Hold on a second. So I went back there, I went back to change for you guys, I got in so much trouble for telling you guys to come up here, so, I liked it though, it was fun, like I never get in trouble anymore so it was good, but you guys kind of have to move out of the fire lane or else I'm dead, so, FYI, they said they would beat me afterward and all this stuff so, anyways, I don't want anyone to get hurt, and I'm in trouble, can you please get back to your seats?

(Doc. No. 40-5 at 2). Contemporaneous with Goodrum and O'Donnell's efforts, Singley positioned himself at the top of sections 2 and 3 with another guest services employee to prevent the crowd shift from moving forward. (Id. ). Singley observed patrons climbing over railings and prepositioned bicycle racks at the tops of the sections; however, Singley notes that the majority of patrons gave up, turned around, and walked away. (Id. at 7).

C. The Instant Suit

On July 7, 2017, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendants. (Doc. No. 1). In her Amended Complaint, Plaintiff asserts individual claims of negligence against (1) Stefani; and (2) Live Nation, under the doctrine of respondeat superior, for the negligence of Live Nation's employed security personnel; and seeks compensatory damages for the alleged negligence. (Doc. 13, ¶¶ 23-31). Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages against Stefani. (Id. ¶¶ 32–33). In September 2017, Defendants filed answers, (Doc. Nos. 15–16). On January 25, 2018, Defendant Live Nation moved for judgment on the pleadings, (Doc. No. 25). Plaintiff timely filed an opposition brief, and Defendant Live Nation timely filed a reply brief. On August 30, 2018, Defendants Stefani and Live Nation filed separate motions for summary judgment against Plaintif...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Harris v. Vanderburg
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of North Carolina
    • February 10, 2022
    ...to endanger the safety of the visitor." Foster, 303 N.C. at 639–40, 281 S.E.2d at 38 (quotation omitted); see Stricklin v. Stefani, 358 F. Supp. 3d 516, 531–32 (W.D.N.C. 2018). In a landlord-tenant relationship, "[a] tenant is normally seen as an invitee." Shepard v. Drucker & Falk, 63 N.C.......
  • Harris v. Vanderburg
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of North Carolina
    • February 10, 2022
    ... ... the visitor." Foster. 303 N.C. At 639-40, 281 ... S.E.2d at 38 (quotation omitted); see Stricklin v ... Stefani , 358 F.Supp.3d 516, 531-32 (W.D. N.C. 2018). In ... a landlord-tenant relationship, "[a] tenant is normally ... ...
  • Common Cause v. Lewis
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of North Carolina
    • January 7, 2019
  • Crossroads Trucking Corp. v. TruNorth Warranty Plans of N. Am.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of North Carolina
    • August 31, 2022
    ... ... Plaintiff's injury, and (4) Plaintiff suffered damages as ... the result of [Defendant's] breach. Stricklin v ... Stefani , 358 F.Supp.3d 516, 525 (W.D. N.C. 2018). As ... mentioned above, this Court has previously held that ... “‘[a] ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT