Daniel Dean v. Patrick Carby, 2023 CA 000659

Daniel Dean fell over a skid steer attachment on Patrick Carby’s farm on July 27, 2020.
Dean sued Carby under a premises liability theory, alleging Carby was negligent in breaching duties owed to invitees.
After discovery, Carby moved for summary judgment, which was granted by the Grayson Circuit Court.
Dean appealed, challenging the finding that the condition was not “unreasonably dangerous.”
Dean was considered an invitee, and both parties agreed on this status. Dean was aware of the farm equipment’s location and condition, as he had observed it during prior visits and on the day of the injury.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the skid steer attachment created an unreasonably dangerous condition	Dean argued the equipment was an unreasonably dangerous hazard to an invitee	Carby argued it was open, obvious, and known to Dean, so no duty was breached	Court held the hazard was obvious/known and not unreasonably dangerous
Whether summary judgment was appropriate	Dean argued facts should go to a jury	Carby argued reasonable minds could not differ, so summary judgment was proper	Summary judgment affirmed as no material fact was in dispute

Bruner v. Cooper, 677 S.W.3d 252 (Ky. 2023) (articulates standard for appellate review of summary judgment)
City of Barbourville v. Hoskins, 655 S.W.3d 137 (Ky. 2022) (defines unreasonably dangerous condition in premises liability)
Lewis v. B & R Corporation, 56 S.W.3d 432 (Ky. App. 2001) (outlines negligence elements under Kentucky law)
Shelton v. Kentucky Easter Seals Soc., Inc., 413 S.W.3d 901 (Ky. 2013) (relationship between premises liability and invitee status)
Kentucky River Medical Center v. McIntosh, 319 S.W.3d 385 (Ky. 2010) (landowner’s duty to warn of unreasonably dangerous conditions)
Bramlett v. Ryan, 635 S.W.3d 831 (Ky. 2021) (defines invitee’s status and rights)