Groh v. Westin Operator, LLC
352 P.3d 472
Colo. Ct. App.2013Background
- Groh stayed at Westin; group of around seven, including Groh, were in a room with three keys issued; Groh evacuated after hotel deemed the party excessive.
- Security guards and hotel staff engaged in negotiations to evict Groh and others; Groh was intoxicated and accompanied by intoxicated companions.
- Groh was escorted to the front entrance; the exterior environment was cold; Groh sought a taxi but was denied waiting in the lobby.
- Groh then entered a taxi with Angela Reed driving; Reed's BAC later estimated between 0.170 and 0.222.
- The car accident occurred miles from the hotel while Groh was a passenger; Groh sustained severe, permanent injuries.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for Westin, ruling Westin had no duty to prevent drunk driving post-eviction; Groh appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duty to evict reasonably by innkeeper | Groh argues innkeeper owes duty to evict with ordinary care. | Westin contends no duty extends to post-eviction injuries. | Duty to evict reasonably recognized; factual questions remain. |
| Scope of innkeeper's duty during eviction | Groh asserts broader duty to protect from foreseeable post-eviction harm. | Westin argues duty limited and ends at eviction. | Duty may extend to reasonably foreseeable post-eviction harm under facts; not universally broad. |
| Proximate cause of Groh's injuries | Westin's breach foreseeably caused Groh's injuries. | Intervening driver and independent events break causation. | Jury could determine proximate cause; not appropriate for per se resolution. |
| Assumed duty of care | Westin advertisements/training create assumed duty to prevent harm. | No evidence Westin undertook service to prevent Groh's specific harm. | No broad assumed-duty found; record insufficient. |
| Breach of contract associated with eviction | Groh contends eviction breach; Westin waived rights by issuing 3 keys. | No waiver as to guests beyond three; eviction lawful. | No contract-based waiver proven; focus remains on negligence. |
Key Cases Cited
- New Albany Hotel Co. v. Dingman, 66 Colo. 306, 181 P. 126 (Colo. 1919) (innkeeper liability extends to safeguarding guest property; liability may continue beyond eviction in limited contexts)
- University of Denver v. Whitlock, 744 P.2d 54 (Colo. 1987) (innkeeper/guest special relationship; duty factors apply; nonfeasance considerations)
- Allen v. Ramada Inn, Inc., 778 P.2d 291 (Colo.App. 1989) (innkeeper duty to protect guests from third persons)
- Rodriguez v. Primadonna Co., 216 P.3d 793 (Nev. 2009) (duty to evict reasonably; hotel not required to prevent intoxicated patron's post-eviction harm)
- Hoff v. Elkhorn Bar, 613 F. Supp. 2d 1146 (D.N.D. 2009) (duty to exercise reasonable care in eviction of patrons)
- McCoy v. Millville Traction Co., 85 A. 358 (N.J. 1912) (consideration of weather/place when ejecting intoxicated passenger)