Hartman v. Clark
341 Ga. App. 513
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Latasha Hartman slipped and fell in a Chick-fil-A restroom owned by defendant David Clark after exiting the handicap stall, injuring her ankle and back.
- Hartman testified at deposition that she slipped on water but also stated there was no water on the restroom floor when she entered the restroom and walked to the stall about five to ten minutes before the fall.
- Hartman did not claim Clark had actual knowledge of the water; her claim rested on constructive knowledge based on alleged inspection failures.
- The trial court granted Clark summary judgment; Hartman appealed asserting factual disputes over inspection procedures and constructive notice.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed summary judgment de novo, construing evidence for the nonmoving party.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Constructive notice / premises liability | Hartman: water had been on floor long enough that reasonable inspections would have discovered it | Clark: no evidence the water existed long enough for discovery; Hartman said no water when she entered 5–10 minutes earlier | Court: No genuine issue — water present at most 10 minutes, insufficient as a matter of law for constructive notice; summary judgment affirmed |
| Interpretation of Hartman’s deposition | Hartman: her testimony could mean she simply did not see water when entering the stall | Clark: her uncontradicted deposition expressly said there was no water when she entered; self-contradiction must be construed against her | Court: Hartman’s testimony was clear and unmodified; cannot be read to create a factual dispute |
Key Cases Cited
- All American Quality Foods v. Smith, 340 Ga. App. 393 (discusses proprietor liability and constructive knowledge standard)
- Gleaton v. APAC-Georgia, 228 Ga. App. 52 (holding 15–20 minutes is legally insufficient to impute notice in similar premises cases)
- Mazur v. Food Giant, 183 Ga. App. 453 (holding a foreign object present for 10–15 minutes does not show actionable negligence)
- Sunlink Health Sys. v. Pettigrew, 286 Ga. App. 339 (party’s unexplained, self-contradictory testimony is construed against that party)