Penton v. Boss Hoggs Catfish Cabin, LLC
| Docket Number: | 2009-CA-01360-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 08-24-2010 Opinion Author: Barnes, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Personal injury - Premises liability - Invitee status - Dangerous condition Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Griffis, Ishee, Roberts, Carlton and Maxwell, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-20-2009 Appealed from: PEARL RIVER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Michael R. Eubanks Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT ENTERED FOR DEFENDANT Case Number: 2008-0096 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | Jodie Penton |
ANDREW CHARLES BURRELL |
|
|
| Appellee: | Boss Hoggs Catfish Cabin, LLC | VICKI R. LEGGETT | ||
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: | Personal injury - Premises liability - Invitee status - Dangerous condition |
| Summary of the Facts: | Jodie Penton filed an action against Boss Hoggs Catfish Cabin, LLC after she fell at the restaurant. LEMIC Insurance Company filed a motion for leave to intervene because of workers-compensation payments made to Penton as a result of the accident. Boss Hoggs filed a motion for summary judgment which the court granted. Penton appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | There is no dispute that Penton was an invitee on the date of the accident. Under Mississippi law, an invitee is a person who goes upon the property of another in answer to the express or implied invitation of the owner for their mutual benefit. Penton went to the restaurant for the purpose of buying catfish dinners for her employer. The duty owed by the landlord to an invitee is a duty of reasonable care for the invitee’s safety. A duty to warn only exists if the operator is aware of a dangerous condition which is not readily apparent to the invitee. The existence of a dangerous condition cannot be shown merely because an accident occurred. On at least two previous occasions, Penton had traversed the concrete pad without incident, and it was only on her return to the restaurant to obtain a receipt that she fell. There is no specification of the difference in height between the parking lot and concrete pad at the location where Penton fell. There is, however, a photograph of the parking lot, concrete pad, and wooden ramp. The photograph shows an obvious distinction between the parking lot, the concrete pad, and the wooden ramp. While the height of the concrete pad may not have been uniform in relation to the parking lot, there is nothing in the record to create a genuine issue of material fact that the concrete pad created a dangerous condition. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
