348 Ga. App. 761
Ga. Ct. App.2019Background
- On October 23, 2015, Shaneku McCurty was shot and killed in the parking lot of a convenience store leased by Rikaz; her mother Shirley Bolton sued the store operator (Rikaz) and the landlord (Golden Business, Inc.).
- Golden built and previously operated the store years earlier, then leased it; Rikaz was the operator at the time of the murder.
- Golden installed bulletproof glass and security cameras in 2000 and its owner, Karim Aly, made periodic site visits but testified he had no knowledge of prior crimes at that location.
- Bolton relied on police reports and other evidence of crime in the surrounding area to argue Golden should have foreseen the assault and acted to protect invitees.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to Golden; Bolton appealed only the ruling as to Golden (claims against Rikaz not before the court).
- The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding Bolton failed to show Golden had superior knowledge of prior similar criminal activity that would make the attack foreseeable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Golden is liable in premises liability for McCurty's murder based on foreseeability of criminal act | Bolton: prior loitering, local violent crimes, and police reports made the assault foreseeable and imposed a duty to protect invitees | Golden: had no actual or superior knowledge of prior similar crimes at the property; security measures were standard and not based on particular notice | Court: Summary judgment for Golden; plaintiff failed to show Golden had knowledge making the crime foreseeable |
| Whether Golden had duty to guard against dangerous characters on property | Bolton: crime in area and store problems should have put Golden on notice | Golden: no evidence Aly observed or was informed of crimes; landlord not required to investigate police files | Court: No duty shown; foreseeability requires landlord's superior knowledge; none proved |
| Nuisance claim based on unsafe premises | Bolton: ongoing criminal activity created a nuisance for which Golden should be liable | Golden: lack of notice/knowledge of the alleged defect prevents nuisance liability | Court: Summary judgment for Golden; nuisance requires notice/knowledge, which Bolton did not establish |
| Punitive damages and attorney fees tied to underlying claims | Bolton: punitive damages and fees available if Golden liable | Golden: since underlying claims fail, punitive/fee claims fail too | Court: Dismissed punitive damages and fee claims as derivative of the dismissed substantive claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Sun Trust Banks v. Killebrew, 266 Ga. 109 (landowner not liable for third-party criminal act absent reasonable grounds to expect it)
- Piggly Wiggly Southern v. Snowden, 219 Ga. App. 148 (prior similar crimes can establish foreseeability)
- Medical Ctr. Hosp. Auth. v. Cavender, 331 Ga. App. 469 (plaintiff must prove property owner had knowledge of prior similar crimes to show foreseeability)
- Baker v. Simon Property Group, 273 Ga. App. 406 (police reports do not establish defendant's knowledge absent evidence they were aware of reports)
- Double View Ventures v. Polite, 326 Ga. App. 555 (evidence of prior violent crime on property can create a factual question of owner/operator knowledge)
- Thompson v. City of Atlanta, 274 Ga. App. 1 (nuisance requires notice or knowledge of the alleged defect)
- Albee v. Krasnoff, 255 Ga. App. 738 (punitive damages/attorney-fee claims fail when underlying substantive claims fail)