Ingles Markets, Inc. v. Carroll, 329 Ga. App. 365

Deborah Ann Carroll slipped/fell after an approximately 11–13 year-old boy ran into her in an Ingles grocery store in Villa Rica, Georgia, on Feb. 11, 2012. The boy and his parents defaulted and are not parties to this appeal.
Carroll had shopped at that Ingles frequently and testified she had not seen children running there before and had not seen this boy prior to the collision.
Store manager Andy Lindgren described regular store inspections: he walks the store multiple times daily and customer service managers perform "sweeps" every two hours with a maintained Store Sweep Log; stock clerks also watch for hazards and running children.
The Store Sweep Log showed a sweep at 12:00 p.m.; Carroll’s incident occurred at about 12:30 p.m. Lindgren and employees had no prior notice of the boy running.
Ingles moved for summary judgment; the trial court denied it and Ingles appealed. The Court of Appeals reviewed de novo and reversed, holding no evidence Ingles had actual or constructive knowledge of the danger.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether proprietor had superior knowledge of a dangerous condition caused by a third party (child running)	Carroll: Ingles’ inspection procedure was deficient (30 minutes between sweep and fall) creating a jury question on constructive notice	Ingles: No actual or constructive notice; regular sweeps and employee monitoring were reasonable and no evidence child had been running long enough to be discovered	Court: No actual or constructive knowledge; summary judgment for Ingles should have been granted

Drew v. Istar Financial, Inc., 291 Ga. App. 323 (recognizing proprietor liability turns on superior knowledge of dangerous condition)
Belk-Hudson Co. v. Davis, 132 Ga. App. 237 (proprietor’s duty to interfere arises only when danger is apparent or reasonably discoverable)
Ginn v. Grothere, 220 Ga. App. 661 (no general duty to continuously patrol premises)
Congleton v. Starlite Skate Center, 175 Ga. App. 438 (same—no duty to continuously patrol under normal circumstances)
Roberts v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 287 Ga. App. 316 (liability for third-party misconduct requires proprietor’s superior knowledge of the risk)
Elliott v. Burkhalter, 173 Ga. App. 749 (sudden, unpreventable third-party acts preclude proprietor liability if unreasonable to have discovered them)
Whitfield v. Tequila Mexican Restaurant No. 1, Inc., 323 Ga. App. 801 (reaffirming superior-knowledge principle for proprietor liability)
W. D. Enterprises, Inc. v. Barton, 218 Ga. App. 857 (proprietor not liable for unforeseeable or remote third-party acts)
Super Discount Markets v. Clark, 213 Ga. App. 132 (foreign-substance inspection cases distinguishable from sudden third-party acts)
Gilbert v. Automotive Purchasing Svc., 254 Ga. App. 770 (foreign-substance inspection precedent)
Dickerson v. Guest Svcs. Co. of Va., 282 Ga. 771 (summary judgment appropriate where evidence is plain, palpable, and undisputed)