Hanna v. Creative Designers, Inc.
2016 IL App (1st) 143727
| Ill. App. Ct. | 2016Background
- Plaintiff Ghada Hanna, a cosmetology independent contractor at Creative Designers’ salon in Luther Village, was struck and injured on December 16, 2010, when a flip-top countertop fell while she was closing her station.
- The salon space and fixtures (including the flip-top countertops) were purchased, installed, and owned by the landlord, Luther Village; the lease allocated repair/maintenance and routine inspections of those fixtures to Luther Village, with tenant to reimburse repairs caused by tenant negligence.
- Creative Designers (tenant) operated the salon; Bruce was president and Shirley Bruce managed day-to-day operations; stylists were independent contractors. Plaintiff had worked there since 2008.
- After the incident Lutheran Village’s maintenance inspected the countertop and reported it functioned properly; plaintiff had lifted the countertop multiple times that day without incident and had given occasional reports of loose screws in the past but could not tie them to the incident date.
- Plaintiff sued multiple defendants for premises liability; the trial court granted summary judgment for Creative Designers and Bruce. Plaintiff appealed only the grant as to Creative Designers.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Creative Designers owed a duty as possessor in control of premises/fixtures | Creative Designers occupied and controlled the salon and lease language requiring Tenant to maintain premises imposed a duty to keep fixtures safe | Lease expressly gave landlord ownership, repair, inspection, and maintenance responsibility for fixtures; tenant lacked control of the fixtures | No duty: Creative Designers lacked control over landlord-owned fixtures; summary judgment affirmed |
| Whether lease provisions retained landlord control despite tenant occupancy | Tenant’s obligation to maintain premises shows tenant responsibility for safety | Lease explicitly retained ownership and repair/control of fixtures with landlord performing inspections and maintenance | Landlord control clauses prevail; landlord had duty to inspect/repair |
| Whether Creative Designers had actual or constructive notice of countertop defect | Prior reports of loose screws and frequent use put Creative Designers on constructive notice | No evidence the condition existed at time of incident or for sufficient time; multiple uses that day without failure; maintenance inspections found no defect | No actual or constructive notice shown; alternative basis for summary judgment |
| Whether genuine issue of material fact existed precluding summary judgment | Allegations about negligent management and holiday decorations interfering with mechanism created triable issues | Evidence did not support those contentions; assertions were speculative and unsupported | No genuine issue of material fact; summary judgment appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Sameer v. Butt, 343 Ill. App. 3d 78 (explains negligence elements and duty analysis)
- Ziemba v. Mierzwa, 142 Ill. 2d 42 (factors for determining existence of duty)
- Genaust v. Illinois Power Co., 62 Ill. 2d 456 (discusses possessor liability under Restatement §343)
- Vesey v. Chicago Housing Authority, 145 Ill. 2d 404 (landlord duty when retaining control over portions of premises)
- Rowe v. State Bank of Lombard, 125 Ill. 2d 203 (landlord not liable for defects on tenant-controlled premises)
- Gilley v. Kiddel, 372 Ill. App. 3d 271 (lease provisions allocating repair/maintenance govern duty)
- O'Connell v. Turner Construction Co., 409 Ill. App. 3d 819 (control requires ability to exclude or alter premises; activity control insufficient)
- Tomczak v. Planetsphere, Inc., 315 Ill. App. 3d 1033 (no liability absent actual or constructive knowledge of defect)
- Evans v. Lima Lima Flight Team, Inc., 373 Ill. App. 3d 407 (appellate court may affirm on any basis supported in record)