Corley v. Evans


<- Return to Search Results


Docket Number: 2001-CA-00762-SCT

Supreme Court: Opinion Link
Opinion Date: 01-16-2003
Opinion Author: Carlson, J.
Holding: Affirmed

Additional Case Information: Topic: Premises liability - Duty of care - Licensee - Third-party conduct
Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., Smith, P.J., Waller and Cobb, JJ.
Non Participating Judge(s): McRae, P.J., and Graves, J.
Dissenting Author : Diaz and Easley, JJ.
Procedural History: Jury Trial/JNOV
Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY

Trial Court: Date of Trial Judgment: 05-04-2001
Appealed from: Smith County Circuit Court
Judge: Robert G. Evans
Disposition: A jury entered a $2.5 million verdict in favor of the Appellant, and the circuit court granted a JNOV.
Case Number: 94-0168

  Party Name: Attorney Name:  
Appellant: Scott Corley




S. WAYNE EASTERLING EUGENE COURSEY TULLOS



 

Appellee: James F. Evans and Stacy Evans (Hamrick) JOHN B. MACNEILL JASON SCOTCH EHRLINSPIEL ADAM BRADLEY KILGORE VICKI R. LEGGETT RANCE N. ULMER  

Synopsis provided by:

If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals
hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office.

Topic: Premises liability - Duty of care - Licensee - Third-party conduct

Summary of the Facts: Scott Corley brought a suit for injuries and damages he sustained as a result of a shooting on land belonging to James Evans and his daughter Stacy Evans Hamrick. The jury returned a verdict for $2.5 million in Corley’s favor, assigning eighty percent liability to James, and twenty percent liability to Stacy. The court entered judgment against James in the amount of $2,000,000 and against Stacy in the amount of $500,000. The court later vacated the judgment. Corley appeals, and the Evanses cross-appeal.

Summary of Opinion Analysis: Issue 1: Duty of care An invitee is one who goes upon the premises of another in answer to the express or implied invitation of the owner for their mutual advantage, while a licensee is one who enters upon the property of another for his own convenience pursuant to the license or implied permission of the owner. Because Stacy received a $7 admission fee from Corley and Corley received the benefit of attending the crawfish boil, his status was that of an invitee. The landowner owes an invitee the duty to keep the premises reasonably safe, and when not reasonably safe, to warn only where there is hidden danger that is not in plain and open view. The introduction of a pistol and one friend accidentally shooting another friend at the crawfish boil did not provide Stacy with adequate warning and were not reasonably foreseeable. Therefore, the court properly granted Stacy’s JNOV motion. With regard to James, James derived no benefit from the crawfish boil and was not involved in its promotion or staging. Therefore, he only had the duty to refrain from willfully or wantonly injuring Corley, and the record does not show any evidence that he willfully or wantonly injured Corley. Issue 2: Third-party conduct Corley urges adoption of the “California Rule” of premises liability regarding third party conduct which is a "totality of the circumstances" standard as opposed to a "cause to anticipate" standard. There is no reason to abandon Mississippi’s well-established premises liability law concerning third-party conduct. In this case, the third-party assault on Corley was not foreseeable because the requisite “cause to anticipate” did not arise since Stacy had no actual or constructive knowledge of the aggressor’s violent nature or actual or constructive knowledge that an atmosphere of violence existed on her land.


Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court