249 So. 3d 907
La. Ct. App.2018Background
- On March 11, 2015, Earline Couvillion fell while exiting cement stairs at a Riverside Properties building; the stairs were frayed on the edges and lacked a handrail.
- Couvillion alleges serious lumbar and knee injuries resulting from the fall and sued Riverside Properties and its insurer on negligence/owner liability grounds.
- Plaintiff contends the stairs were worn, required handrails, and that a handrail would have prevented or mitigated the fall; she submitted an industrial engineer’s affidavit/report to support causation and dangerous condition.
- Riverside moved for summary judgment; the district court granted the motion on September 18, 2017, dismissing Couvillion’s claims. Couvillion appealed.
- The appellate court reviewed the summary judgment de novo and found genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the existence of an unreasonably dangerous condition, notice, causation, and preventability.
- The appellate court reversed the summary judgment and remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existence of an unreasonably dangerous condition on the stairs | Stairs were worn/frayed and lacked a handrail, creating a dangerous condition (supported by expert report) | Stairs not shown to be unreasonably dangerous as a matter of law | Genuine issue of material fact exists; cannot decide as matter of law for defendant |
| Notice/knowledge of defect (La. C.C. art. 2317.1) | Riverside knew or should have known of the defective/worn stairs and lack of handrail | No adequate proof Riverside knew or should have known of the condition | Plaintiff produced sufficient evidence raising factual dispute on notice; summary judgment improper |
| Causation and preventability of damages | Expert opinion ties injuries to the unsafe condition and opines damages could have been prevented by reasonable care/handrail | Defendant argued lack of proof causally linking condition to injuries/prevention | Expert affidavit and record create disputed issues on causation/preventability; summary judgment inappropriate |
| Entitlement to summary judgment | N/A (plaintiff opposed motion) | Defendant asserted record showed no genuine issue of material fact and sought dismissal | Court reversed: mover (defendant) not entitled to judgment as matter of law given factual disputes |
Key Cases Cited
- Kennedy v. Sheriff of East Baton Rouge, 935 So.2d 669 (La. 2006) (standard of review and summary judgment principles)
- Banks v. New Orleans Sewerage and Water Board, 728 So.2d 527 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1999) (owner/custodian duty to discover and correct or warn of unreasonably dangerous conditions)
- Dupre v. The Saenger Arts Center, Inc., 508 So.2d 837 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1987) (lack of handrail and worn stairs can create unreasonably dangerous condition)
- Richardson v. City of Gramercy, 772 So.2d 682 (La. App. 5th Cir. 2000) (worn stair tread/broken steps as unreasonably dangerous conditions)
- Cazes v. Parish of West Baton Rouge, 744 So.2d 54 (La. App. 1st Cir. 1998) (conditions creating an unreasonably dangerous premises)