LeCroy v. Bragg
319 Ga. App. 884
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Bragg, as plaintiff, sues Stephens County and two county employees for premises liability after injuring in a hole in a county recycling center parking lot.
- The trial court denied a defendants’ summary-judgment request but granted judgment on the pleadings for the County; LeCroy and Miller sought interlocutory review.
- The undisputed facts show Bragg drove into the lot, avoided several holes, parked, unloaded trash, and then fell into a large pothole while stepping backward.
- Bragg testified the holes were open and visible, there was no obstruction to seeing the potholes, and she knew of the hazard and had walked around it during her entry and exit.
- The pothole is characterized as a static defect, and Bragg’s knowledge was at least equal to the landowner’s, so the owner did not owe a duty under OCGA § 51-3-1.
- The court reversed, stating Bragg’s knowledge barred recovery and noting a potential constructive-notice issue for the County
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Bragg’s knowledge of the hazard defeats premises liability. | Bragg contends there is a genuine issue about her knowledge relative to the owner’s knowledge. | Bragg had equal or superior knowledge of the hazard, bars recovery. | Yes; Bragg had equal knowledge, bar resl. |
| Whether the pothole, as a static defect, negates liability given visibility. | Bragg argues visibility does not negate a duty under owner’s notice. | Pothole is a readily visible static defect; owner not liable if plaintiff knew or could have seen. | Static defect and plain view evidence support no liability. |
Key Cases Cited
- McLemore v. Genuine Parts Co., 313 Ga. App. 641 (Ga. App. 2012) (summary-judgment standards; equal-knowledge framework in trip-and-fall)
- Campbell v. Savannah Motors, 311 Ga. App. 460 (Ga. App. 2011) (equal-knowledge prerequisite to duty under OCGA § 51-3-1)
- Thomas v. Executive Committee of the Baptist Convention of the State of Ga., 262 Ga. App. 315 (Ga. App. 2003) (static defects; visibility considerations in duty analysis)
- Robinson v. Kroger Co., 268 Ga. 735 (Ga. 1997) (premises-liability principles; evidentiary considerations)
- Hannah v. Hampton Auto Parts, 234 Ga. App. 392 (Ga. App. 1998) (premises-liability standard; ordinary-care concept)
- Zack’s Properties v. Gafford, 241 Ga. App. 43 (Ga. App. 1999) (jury question on visibility and hazards in parking)