481 S.E.2d 870 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1997
Hazel O. Elder sued Care-More, Inc. (“Care-More”), the owner and operator of the Bolingreen Nursing Center to recover for injuries allegedly sustained from a slip and fall on ice near the nursing home entrance. Elder appeals the summary judgment awarded to Care-More.
Viewed in the light most favorable to Elder, the non-movant, the evidence was as follows. On March 13, 1993, a severe winter storm blanketed middle Georgia including the area surrounding Care-More’s nursing home. As the storm front thrust through the area it left behind heavy amounts of snow and ice, downed trees, and knocked out electrical power. Because of the inclement weather,
Elder asserts that summary judgment was precluded by the existence of material issues of fact as to whether Care-More had superior knowledge of the presence of ice near its entranceway and failed to take reasonable steps to protect her. We disagree.
To establish liability for a slip and fall due to a foreign substance, a plaintiff must establish that: (1) the defendant had actual or constructive knowledge of the foreign substance, and (2) that the plaintiff was without knowledge of the substance or for some reason attributable to the defendant was prevented from discovering the foreign substance. Alterman Foods v. Ligon, 246 Ga. 620, 623 (272 SE2d 327) (1980). In this case, Elder cannot satisfy prong two of Ligon. Elder indisputably was aware of the perilous outdoor wintry conditions. Further, she testified that she observed snow in the nursing home parking lot and admitted she knew that ice melts more slowly in the shade. Elder offered no evidence that Care-More prevented her from discovering the ice or distracted her.
Elder’s bare assertion that she did not see the ice before she fell is negated by her admission that she did not look down as she was walking. Elder was obligated to use all of her senses in a reasonable manner to learn of and discover the ice so that she could traverse it safely. Smith v. Wal-Mart Stores, 199 Ga. App. 808, 810 (406 SE2d 234) (1991). See Moore v. Kroger Co., 221 Ga. App. 520, 522 (471 SE2d 916) (1996). It was incumbent upon her to keep a careful lookout, especially given the prevailing adverse conditions. See Telligman v. Monumental Properties, 161 Ga. App. 13, 16 (2) (288 SE2d 846) (1982) (summary judgment foreclosed where plaintiff kept “vigilant lookout” for presence of ice in her path); accord Ingram v. Toccoa Triple Cinema, 222 Ga. App. 409 (474 SE2d 293) (1996). Elder’s fail
Judgment affirmed.