Williams v. City of Centralia

• Docket Number: 57145-5-II
• Decision Date: 28 November 2023
• Parties: CORRINE WILLIAMS, wife, Appellant, v. CITY OF CENTRALIA, a government entity; CENTRALIA SCHOOL DISTRICT 401, a quasi-governmental entity, Respondents. PAUL WILLIAMS, husband, Plaintiff below,
• Court: Washington Court of Appeals

1

CORRINE WILLIAMS, wife, Appellant,

PAUL WILLIAMS, husband, Plaintiff below,
v.
CITY OF CENTRALIA, a government entity; CENTRALIA SCHOOL DISTRICT 401, a quasi-governmental entity, Respondents.

No. 57145-5-II

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2

November 28, 2023

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

CRUSER, A.C.J.

Corrine Williams sued the City of Centralia and Centralia School District for negligence after falling in Fort Borst Park and breaking her ankle. Williams was at the park tailgating with the intention of later attending a softball tournament. Williams fell when she stepped off a sidewalk into a grassy swale, and she alleges that the height drop-off between the two surfaces was a hidden hazard that caused her fall. The District moved for summary judgment, arguing it was immune from suit under recreational use immunity and that even if immunity did not apply, Williams failed to present evidence of breach. The City joined in the summary judgment

2

motion.^[1] The court granted summary judgment and dismissed the case, finding that Williams failed to present evidence of breach and that the defendants were entitled to recreational use immunity as a matter of law.

Williams now appeals, arguing that the court erred in granting summary judgment. She argues that the District and the City are not entitled to summary judgment based on the recreational use immunity statute because factual disputes remained as to whether the softball tournament was charging fees for attendance, whether the site of her fall was integral to the park's fee-generating area, and whether the height difference between the sidewalk and the swale was a latent condition not readily apparent to a recreational user.

We affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment because Williams has failed to present evidence showing (1) that a fee was charged, (2) that the site of the injury was integral to any fee-generating portion of the park, or (3) that the injury-causing condition was latent.

3

FACTS

I. Injury

Fort Borst Park is a 101-acre park that sits on land owned by the City and land owned by the District. The park does not charge an entry fee or parking fee. The park includes several softball fields, divided across two sections of the park known as the Borst Park Softball Complex (Wheeler Field and Fields 2-4) and the Quad Fields (Fields 6-9). Tournaments are sometimes held at the Softball Complex for which the tournament's host can charge a fee. Adjacent to Field 9 lies a parking lot. A sidewalk runs between the parking lot and the Quad Fields. Between the parking lot and the sidewalk lies a swale,^[2] and the swale is transected by culverts. The culvert pipes are topped with gravel and the rest of the swale is grassy.

On May 18, 2016, Williams drove to Fort Borst Park after work intending to watch a softball tournament at the Softball Complex. Williams did not pay a fee to enter the park or to park in the parking lot. After parking her car in the parking lot adjacent to Field 9, Williams joined a group of 10-12 people drinking beer and eating pizza. Some of the tailgaters were standing in the swale and others were on the other side of the swale. Williams walked across the swale to the sidewalk where her grandchildren were standing. Then, she saw two of her friends in the parking lot and called to them, intending to walk in their direction. She did not want to use one of the gravel paths across the swale because to reach the gravel path would have required backtracking and walking through busy parking lot traffic. Without looking down, she stepped onto the swale from the sidewalk and immediately lost her balance due to the height drop-off. Williams fell and broke

4

multiple bones in her ankle, an injury that required multiple surgeries and left Williams in constant, intense pain that impacts her quality of life.

II. Litigation

Williams sued the City of Centralia and Centralia School District for negligence in July 2019. She alleged that her fall was caused by "the deceptive discrepancy in the height difference between grass culvert and concrete walkway." Clerk's Papers (CP) at 4. The City and the District asserted recreational use immunity as an affirmative defense.

In the sole deposition in this litigation, Williams was deposed in September 2020. She testified that she was not charged a fee to enter the park or to park in the parking lot. As to whether she would have been charged a fee to enter the softball tournament, she was "not a hundred percent sure that they were charging entries into district tournaments at that time, but that's a standard now." Id. at 234. With respect to the condition of the ground, she testified that when she stepped up from the swale onto the sidewalk, she did not notice any overgrown grass in the area. She did testify that "[t]here was a drop between the concrete and the base of that grass" and that "everybody was drawing attention to it" after she fell. Id. at 239.

Williams was questioned about an exhibit consisting of her unsigned and undated handwritten notes. Williams did not recall when she wrote the notes. In the notes, she wrote "[s]tepped down off edge of sidewalk to grass that appeared even - it wasn't." Id. at 92. She continued, "4-6 inch 'hole' with overgrown grass." Id. When asked, she clarified that what her notes called a hole would be better described as a drop-off or ledge, but did not elaborate on the length of the grass. She stated, "there was grass all around it" and that she "couldn't see that" referring to the drop-off. Id. at 240.

5

On June 10, 2022, the District moved for summary judgment, arguing that (1) it was immune from liability as a matter of law under recreational use immunity, (2) Williams failed to present sufficient evidence that the District breached any duty, and (3) Williams caused her own injury by failing to exercise reasonable care. It attached portions of Williams' deposition and a declaration by its Director of Facilities and Maintenance, Eric Wilson. Wilson declared that "[w]hen the park's Softball Complex is used for tournaments, the host of the tournament generally charges a fee for admission to the [S]oftball [C]omplex." Id. at 96. The City joined in the District's motion.

Williams responded that genuine issues of material fact remained as to (1) whether the area where Williams fell was an integral part of the fee-generating part of the park, which would preclude recreational use immunity as a matter of law; (2) whether the height difference was a known, artificial, dangerous, latent condition; (3) whether the defendants breached their duty to Williams by failing to keep the park reasonably safe for invitees; and (4) whether and to what extent Williams was contributorily negligent.

In support of her response, Williams provided the declaration of safety expert Tom Baird. She hired Baird on June 8, conducted a site visit with Baird on June 16, received Baird's report on June 21, filed the declaration and provided a copy of Baird's report to the defendants on June 27, 2022. In his declaration, Baird defined "hazard" as "a condition that can cause injury to a person." Id. at 364. He defined "unreasonably hazardous and dangerous condition" as "a condition that could have, and should have, been eliminated prior to an injury incident." Id. He opined as follows:

Opinion #1 - The elevated walkway with grass overgrowing it created a hidden change in elevation and a trip hazard that was an unreasonably hazardous and dangerous condition that presented an unreasonable and foreseeable risk of

6

injury to Ms. Williams as she [was] crossing from the walkway across a dry swale to the parking lot abutting the swale.

Opinion #2 - The unreasonably hazardous and dangerous condition of the elevated walkway with grass overgrowing it created a hidden change in elevation and a trip hazard and was such that the owners and managers of the property should have discovered the condition through reasonable care.

Opinion #3 - The owners and managers of the property failed to perform adequate inspections to discover the unreasonably hazardous and dangerous [condition] of the elevated walkway with grass overgrowing it that created a change in elevation and a hidden trip hazard.

Opinion #4 - The owners and managers of the property failed to maintain the incident area in a reasonably safe condition so that the hidden trip hazard was not present.

Opinion #5 - No warnings were placed to warn Ms. Williams of the unreasonably hazardous and dangerous condition of the elevated walkway with grass overgrowing it that created a change in elevation and a hidden trip hazard.

Opinion #6 - The unreasonably hazardous and dangerous condition of the elevated walkway with grass overgrowing it that created a change in elevation and a hidden trip hazard, could have, and should have, been eliminated prior to the incident.

Opinion #7 - The unreasonably hazardous and dangerous condition of the elevated walkway with grass overgrowing that created a change in elevation and a hidden trip hazard was the cause of Ms. Williams' trip and fall.

Opinion #8 - Signage should have been placed to guide persons to a designated walkway to the baseball fields and to prohibit persons from crossing from the parking lot over the swale to the walkway.

Opinion #9 - It is more likely than not that Ms. Williams stepped onto the walkway without realizing that there was a change in elevation because the

...