Shameka Rushing v. AMISUB (SFH), Inc.
W2016-01897-COA-R3-CV
| Tenn. Ct. App. | Feb 8, 2017Background
- On Aug. 23, 2013, Rushing slipped and fell on a clear liquid in the St. Francis Hospital ER lobby and alleged injuries to her back, left hip, and left ankle.
- Rushing sued the hospital (AMISUB d/b/a St. Francis) for negligent maintenance, failure to warn, and failure to inspect; she later amended to add Crothall, the housekeeping contractor.
- Defendants denied liability and asserted comparative fault; both moved for summary judgment arguing Rushing had no evidence of who caused the spill, how long it existed, or that defendants had notice.
- Rushing (pro se) claimed hospital employees told her the spill was Sprite and that Crothall had been called and thought they had cleaned it up, but she did not depose those employees.
- The only employee testimony in the record (nurse Christi Leonard) was that she did not witness the fall, had no notice of the spill before the fall, and had no knowledge of how long any liquid might have been on the floor.
- Trial court granted summary judgment for both defendants for lack of proof of actual or constructive notice; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether summary judgment was improper because Rushing presented evidence that defendants had notice of the spill | Rushing: hospital staff told her the liquid was Sprite and that Crothall had been contacted and thought they had cleaned it up (implying notice) | Defendants: no admissible evidence shows who created the spill, how long it existed, or that they had actual or constructive notice; employee statements alleged by Rushing were undeveloped and not in the record | Court: Affirmed summary judgment — Rushing failed to present material evidence of actual or constructive notice, so defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law |
Key Cases Cited
- Blair v. W. Town Mall, 130 S.W.3d 761 (Tenn. 2004) (premises-liability notice and owner responsibility principles)
- Parker v. Holiday Hosp. Franchising, Inc., 446 S.W.3d 341 (Tenn. 2014) (owner duty to remove or warn where owner had or should have had knowledge)
- Rye v. Women's Care Ctr. of Memphis, MPLLC, 477 S.W.3d 235 (Tenn. 2015) (summary-judgment standards for nonmoving party to produce specific facts)
- Kirby v. Macon County, 892 S.W.2d 402 (Tenn. 1994) (definition of actual notice)