Hayes v. SNS Partnership, LP
326 Ga. App. 185
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Hayes injured her knee when a self-closing Steak ’n Shake door closed on her shoe, causing a fall.
- Hayes sued SNS Partnership, LP (owner) and Steak ’n Shake Operations, Inc. (operator).
- The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants; Hayes challenged the ruling and an evidentiary ruling.
- The court reviews summary-judgment de novo, viewing evidence in the nonmovant’s favor to identify genuine issues of material fact.
- Hayes had previously visited the restaurant but did not open the door herself on those prior visits; on April 6, 2010 she opened it alone and was injured when the door pushed closed.
- The door is self-closing; after the fall, an employee removed Hayes’s sandal from under the door; managers inspected later and found no abnormality.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Motion to strike sworn statements | Hayes sought to strike Rozar/Smith statements as non-affidavits. | Sworn statements admissible for summary judgment purposes; not improperly admitted. | No error in denying strike; statements may be considered. |
| Sufficient evidence of a dangerous condition | Door’s operation and prior incidents show a dangerous condition known to defendants. | No evidence of defect or dangerous condition; door operated normally and no prior complaints. | No triable issue; summary judgment affirmed. |
| Knowledge of danger | Defendant knew or should have known of danger due to door’s behavior or maintenance. | No evidence of prior malfunction or knowledge of danger. | Insufficient evidence to create fact issue; defendant not liable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lau’s Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491 (1991) (summary judgment standard; evidence beyond pleadings allowed)
- Dalton v. City of Marietta, 280 Ga. App. 202 (2006) (trial court may consider admissible material beyond affidavits at summary judgment)
- Siegel v. Park Avenue Condominium Assn., 322 Ga. App. 337 (2013) (absence of evidence of defect or excessiveness defeats negligence claim)
- Metts v. Wal-Mart Stores, 269 Ga. App. 366 (2004) (proof of injury alone does not establish liability without dangerous-condition evidence)
- Johnston v. Grand Union Co., 189 Ga. App. 270 (1988) (single incident without known defect insufficient to show knowledge of danger)