Wilson v. Duncan
| Decision Date | 02 February 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. A94A0253,A94A0253 |
| Parties | WILSON v. DUNCAN et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Young, Clyatt, Turner, Thagard & Hoffman, William A. Turner, Jr., Atlanta, for appellant.
Del Percilla, Jr., Long & Denton, Allen D. Denton, Quitman, for appellees.
We granted this interlocutory appeal to review the trial court's denial of appellant's motion for summary judgment.
Appellees Marybel Duncan (Duncan) and her husband brought the underlying action to recover damages for injuries Marybel Duncan sustained 1 when she fell in a hair-styling business operated by appellant Debra Wilson (Wilson) d/b/a The Hair Station. Duncan entered The Hair Station through a rear entrance that was normally used for employees. Once inside The Hair Station, Duncan fell when descending a single step, which created a level change near the back of the shop. Duncan is unaware why or how she fell; she deposed that she did not stumble or trip over anything. Duncan deposed: "I think I fell when my foot went down to take the step, but I'm not exactly sure." Duncan further deposed that there was nothing in the area where she fell except carpet and the step. Duncan's grandson averred that the carpet changed color at the step; red carpet on the top of the step and white carpet on the lower level. Duncan's granddaughter averred that Wilson placed two signs warning customers to watch their step at the rear entrance, prior to her grandmother's fall.
It has long been the position of this court that Cook v. Delite Beauty Supply, 165 Ga.App. 859, 860(2), 303 S.E.2d 40 (1983), rev'd on other grounds sub nom. Charles Rossignol, Inc. v. Prophecy Corp., 177 Ga.App. 245, 247, 339 S.E.2d 288 (1985). See also Simone v. Hancock Textile Co., 175 Ga.App. 191, 192, 332 S.E.2d 669 (1985) and Lamberson v. Norris, 135 Ga.App. 647, 649, 218 S.E.2d 658 (1975).
In the present case, Duncan does not assert any facts upon which Wilson could be found negligent; Duncan does not contend that the area was improperly lit, that the step was obscured from view so that it could not be seen by one who looked at the floor, that the carpet was ripped or torn, or that she was distracted. See Lamberson, supra. Duncan has merely shown that she fell in the area of a single step in the back of Wilson's shop. Wilson v....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Peterson Properties Corp. v. Finch
...one, does not establish liability. Gyles, Inc. v. Turner, 184 Ga. App. 376, 377, 361 S.E.2d 538 (1987); see Wilson v. Duncan, 211 Ga.App. 814, 815, 440 S.E.2d 550 (1994). The true ground of liability is a defendant's superior knowledge of the defective condition. Roberts v. Gardens Svcs., 1......
-
Steele v. Rosehaven Chapel, Inc.
...more than the occurrence of a fall is not sufficient to establish negligence or to give rise to liability. Wilson v. Duncan, 211 Ga.App. 814, 815, 440 S.E.2d 550 (1994). It is axiomatic that "[i]n everyday life, persons are required to negotiate the floors, steps and doorways of buildings."......
-
Lee v. Food Lion
...166, 167, 279 S.E.2d 342 (1981). The mere occurrence of an injury does not create a presumption of negligence. Wilson v. Duncan, 211 Ga.App. 814, 815, 440 S.E.2d 550 (1994). The owner/occupier is not required to warrant the safety of all persons from all things, but to exercise the diligenc......
-
Howard v. Gram Corp.
...817, 507 S.E.2d 259 (1998). 9. Rice v. Elliott, 256 Ga.App. 87, 567 S.E.2d 721 (2002). 10. (Punctuation omitted.) Wilson v. Duncan, 211 Ga.App. 814, 440 S.E.2d 550 (1994). 11. See Rice, 12. 262 Ga.App. 490, 586 S.E.2d 5 (2003). 13. Id. at 491-492, 586 S.E.2d 5. 14. See Crane v. Smith, 23 Ca......
-
Torts - Cynthia Trimboli Adams and Charles R. Adams, Iii
...214, 435 S.E.2d 734 (1993). 74. 996 F.2d 266 (11th Cir. 1993). 75. Id. at 270. 76. Id. at 269-70. 77. Id. at 269. Cf. Wilson v. Duncan, 211 Ga. App. 814, 440 S.E.2d 550 (1994) (uneven floor levels; defendant not liable). 78. O.C.G.A. Sec. 9-11-9.1 (1993). 79. See Cynthia Trimboli Adams, et ......