H. J. Wings & Wings v. Goodman, 320 Ga. App. 54

Mrs. Goodman slipped and fell at Wings and Things while picking up a food order in January 2010.
Plaintiff alleges the fall was caused by an unreasonable hazard (excess wax) on the floor.
Wings and Things moved for summary judgment, which the trial court denied.
Record evidence showed Mrs. Goodman could not identify a specific hazardous condition.
Defendant argued there was no admissible evidence of a hazardous condition or of defendant’s superior knowledge.
Court reverses, granting summary judgment for Wings and Things on causation and hazard absence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a hazardous condition existed that caused the fall	Goodman asserts a slippery, waxed floor caused the fall	Wings and Things contends no Hazard existed; floor not waxed	Hazard not proven; no unreasonable condition shown
Admissibility of evidence on subsequent remedial measures and knowledge	Remedial cleaning evidence shows defendant’s knowledge of hazard	Remedial evidence inadmissible to prove negligence; no prior knowledge shown	Remedial measures evidence inadmissible; cannot establish prior knowledge

Belk Dept. Store of Charleston, S.C. v. Cato, 267 Ga. App. 793 (2004) (premises liability and lack of hazardous condition requires evidence of disproportionate risk)
Pinckney v. Covington Athletic Club and Fitness Center, 288 Ga. App. 891 (2007) (need more than slip to prove unreasonable hazard; lack of evidence defeats claim)
Henson v. Ga.-Pacific Corp., 289 Ga. App. 777 (2008) (subsequent remedial measures generally inadmissible to prove negligence; limited use for contemporary knowledge)
Thomas v. Dept. of Transp., 232 Ga. App. 639 (1998) (remedial measures not proof of prior knowledge; contemporaneous knowledge required)
Gross v. Frank’s Warehouse Foods, 192 Ga. App. 539 (1989) (a fall does not prove an unreasonable hazard without evidentiary support)