 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Dulin v. Sowell7/19/2005
NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY
DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED - 07/19/2005
BEFORE KING, C.J., MYERS AND ISHEE, JJ.
. This "slip and fall" case is appealed from the Circuit Court of Panola County, wherein Harvey Sowell's motion for summary judgment was granted. Helen Dulin rented a house from Harvey Sowell. Dulin slipped and fell on a concrete carport at the rental house and sued Sowell for her injuries. The circuit court granted Sowell's motion for summary judgment and Dulin appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment. In particular, Dulin challenges the trial court's holding that Sowell did not breach his duty to provide Dulin with a reasonable, safe place to live and that Sowell did not have knowledge of a defective condition on the premises. Sowell argues that the premises were not unreasonably dangerous and that the circuit court should be affirmed. Aggrieved by the trial court's grant of Sowell's motion for summary judgment, Dulin appeals, raising the following issue:
I. WHETHER SOWELL BREACHED HIS DUTY TO PROVIDE DULIN WITH A REASONABLE, SAFE PLACE TO LIVE AND WHETHER SOWELL HAD KNOWLEDGE OF A DEFECTIVE CONDITION ON THE PREMISES.
Finding no error, we affirm.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
. On April 4, 2002, Dulin was renting a house from Sowell located in Panola County, Mississippi. During a trip to the laundry room located under the carport, Dulin slipped on the concrete and suffered a fractured left ankle. On February 14, 2003, Dulin filed a complaint against Sowell, in which she contends that her fall was due to the presence of moisture on the concrete floor. Dulin further alleged that Sowell was negligent in failing to exercise ordinary care and diligence to keep the carport of the rental home in a safe condition. Dulin attributes the carport's alleged unsafe condition to slippery conditions present in the carport during rainy weather, although she alleges that at the time of her fall, the carport was merely damp due to the concrete's sweating.
LEGAL ANALYSIS
I. WHETHER SOWELL BREACHED HIS DUTY TO PROVIDE DULIN WITH A REASONABLE, SAFE PLACE TO LIVE AND WHETHER SOWELL HAD KNOWLEDGE OF A DEFECTIVE CONDITION ON THE PREMISES.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
. A trial court's grant or denial of a motion for summary judgment is reviewed de novo. Bullock v. Life Ins. Co. of Mississippi, 872 So. 2d 658, 660 ( ) (Miss. 2004) (citing Hurdle v. Holloway, 848 So. 2d 183, 185 (Miss. 2003)). In making this determination, we review all the evidentiary matters in the record and the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion has been made. Id. "If, in this view, there is no genuine issue of material fact, and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, summary judgment should forthwith be entered for the movant. Otherwise, the motion should be denied." Id.
DISCUSSION
. Dulin contends that the trial court's grant of Sowell's motion for summary judgment was in error. Dulin argues that Sowell was negligent in that he failed to exercise ordinary care and diligence to keep the carport of the rental home in a safe condition, creating a fact issue, thus precluding a grant of summary judgment. This area of the law is well-settled in Mississippi.
. Mississippi has adopted the implied warranty of habitability towards landlords through Justice Sullivan's concurrence in O'Cain v. Harvey Freeman and Sons, Inc. of Mississippi, 603 So. 2d 824, 832 (Miss. 1991). (Justices Roy Noble Lee, Prather, Robertson, and Banks also concurred, giving this opinion precedential value). The im
Page 1 2 3 Mississippi Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|