360 So.3d 860
La. Ct. App.2022Background
- Thornhill Brothers Fitness, LLC operated an Anytime Fitness franchise in Port Allen; it purchased a used inversion table from Craigslist in early 2017 in violation of its franchise agreement requiring new, approved-vendor equipment.
- On November 17, 2019, William Flynn used the inversion table at the Thornhill gym; the table came apart and Flynn sustained severe cervical-spine injuries.
- Plaintiffs sued Anytime (franchisor), Thornhill (franchisee), and Thornhill’s insurer for negligence, premises/custodial liability, and vicarious liability.
- Anytime moved for summary judgment, producing evidence that it did not own the premises or equipment, did not exercise day-to-day control over Thornhill, did not select or maintain the inversion table, and had no notice of the Craigslist purchase.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Anytime, finding no genuine issue of material fact that Anytime had custody/control or knowledge and therefore owed no duty; vicarious-liability claims were dismissed/unopposed.
- The First Circuit affirmed, holding as a matter of law that Anytime did not owe a duty to the plaintiffs because it lacked custody/control and no inspection obligation or notice of the defective inversion table existed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether franchisor owed a duty under negligence/premises liability | Flynn: Anytime’s franchise documents and manuals impose sufficient standards/control to create a duty to patrons | Anytime: Franchise relationship reserves day-to-day control to franchisee; franchisor does not own, maintain, or operate the gym/equipment | No duty — summary judgment for Anytime (no custody/control, so no duty) |
| Whether Anytime had care/custody/control ("garde") of the inversion table or premises | Flynn: contractual mandates and standards evidence control over local operations and equipment | Anytime: Franchise agreement expressly leaves day-to-day operation to franchisee; Anytime did not select, finance, place, maintain, or inspect the table | No custody/control — Anytime not liable under custodial/premises theory |
| Whether Anytime had actual or constructive knowledge or an obligation to inspect and discover the inversion table | Flynn: Agreement allows visits/inspections and manuals create expectation Anytime should inspect and discover unsafe equipment | Anytime: Inspections were permissive; the 180-day post-opening inspection (required once) occurred long before table was bought; no notice of Craiglist purchase | No knowledge/inspection duty — plaintiffs failed to show Anytime should have discovered the table |
| Vicarious liability / respondeat superior | Flynn: asserted franchisor liability via agency or control theory | Anytime: No employment/agency relationship; franchisee operates independently | Dismissed by trial court and not challenged on appeal; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Pinsonneault v. Merchants & Farmers Bank & Trust Co., 816 So.2d 270 (La. 2002) (sets out Louisiana duty-risk analysis for negligence)
- Dupree v. City of New Orleans, 765 So.2d 1002 (La. 2000) (factors for determining garde/custody: right of direction/control and benefit derived)
- Espinosa v. Accor North America, Inc., 174 So.3d 123 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2015) (franchisor not liable where no day-to-day control over franchisee)
- Nearhood v. Anytime Fitness, 191 So.3d 707 (La. App. 3d Cir. 2016) (franchise relationship alone insufficient to impose custody/control without operational control)
- Ordeneaux v. Arkel Food Servs., L.L.C., 327 So.3d 521 (La. App. 1st Cir. 2020) (elements for custodial/premises liability include custody/control and actual or constructive knowledge)