Phillip Aldredge v. Timothy B. Smith
799 S.E.2d 263
Ga. Ct. App.2017Background
- In 1988 Aldredge hired a carpenter (Templeman) to remove and rebuild a back deck on his rental house; no building permit was obtained and the deck was attached with nails rather than bolts.
- Aldredge rented the house in 2010, retained the right to enter for repairs/inspections, and replaced several deck boards and gutters that year; he inspected the deck and observed no visible defects.
- On March 19, 2011 the ledger/rim joist failed and the deck collapsed while tenants’ guests were on it, injuring several plaintiffs.
- Post-collapse inspections revealed rot and deterioration of the rim joist that had been concealed by the ledger/board; there was no evidence that the rot was observable prior to collapse.
- The trial court denied Aldredge’s motions for summary judgment, applying OCGA § 44-7-14 for out-of-possession landlords; Aldredge appealed interlocutorily and the Court of Appeals reversed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Aldredge can be liable for faulty construction under OCGA § 44-7-14 | Deck was defectively constructed and caused collapse | Aldredge hired independent contractor and did not supervise construction, so no liability for faulty construction | No — hiring independent contractor defeats faulty-construction liability under precedent |
| Whether Aldredge had actual or constructive notice of a need to repair (failure-to-repair theory) | Landlord should have known or discovered rot/absence of flashing and failed to repair | Aldredge inspected, replaced boards in 2010, observed no visible defect, and had no notice of concealed rot | No triable issue: undisputed evidence shows Aldredge lacked actual/constructive notice, so summary judgment for defendant was required |
| Whether summary judgment was improperly denied based on disputed factual inferences | Plaintiffs point to post-collapse evidence (rot, lack of flashing) and expert observations to create issues for jury | Defendant argues post-collapse observations do not create pre-collapse notice; his testimony pierced plaintiffs’ notice theory | Court: plaintiff’s evidence insufficient to show pre-collapse notice or observable defect; summary judgment reversal appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Cowart v. Widener, 287 Ga. 622 (discusses de novo review and summary judgment burden-shifting)
- Martin v. Hansen, 326 Ga. App. 91 (out-of-possession landlord liability only for faulty construction or failure to repair)
- Martin v. Johnson-Lemon, 271 Ga. 120 (landlord who hires independent contractor without supervision not liable for faulty construction)
- Haynes v. Kingstown Props., Inc., 260 Ga. App. 102 (landlord liable only where on notice of defect; duty to inspect once notice received)
- Silman v. Associates Bellemeade, 294 Ga. App. 764 (landlord entitled to summary judgment where no evidence landlord had notice of latent defect)
- Watts & Colwell Builders, Inc. v. Martin, 313 Ga. App. 1 (no evidence of landlord notice defeated failure-to-repair claim)