Preview:

REL: 01/04/2013

Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o f o r m a l r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e Reporter of Decisions, Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r .

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110683 Matthew Waters and V i c k y Waters v. Paul E n t e r p r i s e s , Inc. Appeal from Mobile C i r c u i t Court (CV-09-901607) THOMAS, J u d g e . Matthew Waters and V i c k y Waters appeal f r o m a summary

judgment e n t e r e d by t h e M o b i l e Enterprises, Paul seeking Inc. ("Paul"), damages

C i r c u i t Court i n favor o f Paul against as a

i n the Waterses' action Matthew

forinjuries

sustained

2110683 result of Paul's alleged negligent We and wanton actions in

maintaining On driver

i t s l o a d i n g dock.

reverse was date

and remand. working he as a truck a to

September f o r Ace

11, 2008, Matthew On that

Hardware.
1

had d e l i v e r e d truck up

shipment

to Paul

and h a d b a c k e d from Paul's

the d e l i v e r y

about f o u r inches

l o a d i n g dock i n o r d e r

to unload

the c o n t e n t s of the d e l i v e r y t r u c k . was Matthew's first trip to Paul's

I t i s undisputed that i t loading dock and that

M a t t h e w o b s e r v e d s e v e r a l P a u l e m p l o y e e s p l a c e two m e t a l p l a t e s upon t h e g r o u n d t o b r i d g e dock and the small before gap b e t w e e n t h e he began loading the that

the d e l i v e r y truck

to unload

contents of the d e l i v e r y truck. Paul the employees had been u s i n g gap for several

I t i s also undisputed

t h e two m e t a l p l a t e s t o the record

bridge the

years because,

reveals,

l o a d i n g d o c k l e v e r h a d n o t b e e n o p e r a t i o n a l s i n c e 2004. w a t c h i n g the Paul employees p l a c e ground t o bridge

After

t h e two m e t a l p l a t e s on t h e

t h e gap, M a t t h e w i n q u i r e d a b o u t t h e u s a g e o f

t h e m e t a l p l a t e s and t h e n p r o c e e d e d t o u n l o a d s e v e r a l l o a d s o f inventory a "pallet Paul Mobile.
1

from the d e l i v e r y t r u c k t o t h e l o a d i n g dock by u s i n g jack." However, on M a t t h e w ' s f o u r t h o r f i f t h Hardware 2 franchisee doing trip

i s an Ace

business i n

2110683 across the metal plates he q u i c k l y c h a n g e d t h e d i r e c t i o n i n

w h i c h he was w a l k i n g out from underneath

and t h e m e t a l p l a t e s s h i f t e d and s l i p p e d him, c a u s i n g him t o f a l l and sustain

injuries. his

M a t t h e w s o u g h t m e d i c a l a t t e n t i o n as t h e r e s u l t o f

injuries. On A u g u s t 19, 2009, t h e W a t e r s e s f i l e d a c o m p l a i n t i n t h e

trial

c o u r t a v e r r i n g t h a t P a u l and s e v e r a l f i c t i t i o u s l y had been n e g l i g e n t dock and by and wanton i n m a i n t a i n i n g metal dock. plates

named Paul's of also On

parties loading

utilizing

i n lieu

maintaining contained

a functional loading

The c o m p l a i n t of Vicky.

a loss-of-consortium

c l a i m on b e h a l f

S e p t e m b e r 23, 2009, P a u l numerous discovery. affirmative

answered t h e c o m p l a i n t and a s s e r t e d The parties conducted

defenses.

On S e p t e m b e r 28, 2011, P a u l judgment. I n i t s motion, Paul

f i l e d a m o t i o n f o r a summary argued that t h e use o f t h e

metal p l a t e s to bridge the loading

t h e gap b e t w e e n t h e d e l i v e r y t r u c k a n d

d o c k was an open a n d o b v i o u s d a n g e r , w h i c h , i t should have recognized argued that i n the exercise i t h a d no of

said,

Matthew

reasonable

care.

I t also

superior

knowledge t h a t t h e m e t a l p l a t e s c o u l d s h i f t

and, t h u s , t h a t i t

3

2110683 c o u l d not excerpts judgment. in have w a r n e d M a t t h e w o f s u c h a r i s k . Paul attached

f r o m M a t t h e w ' s d e p o s i t i o n t o i t s m o t i o n f o r a summary On November 15, to the 2011, the Waterses f i l e d a response motion. usage of In the their metal issues metal the

opposition the

summary-judgment argued that the

response, p l a t e s may of

Waterses

have b e e n open b u t fact an regarding

that there the

were g e n u i n e usage of the

material was

whether The

plates

obvious

danger.

Waterses

attached

a f f i d a v i t and d e p o s i t i o n t e s t i m o n y o f M a t t h e w ; t h e t e s t i m o n y of R a l p h P a u l , Paul's affidavit and deposition witness; Matthew's corporate of

deposition the the Dr. the

representative; James Dobbs, testimony of and

testimony the

Dr.

Waterses' expert Robert Zarzour,

deposition

treating

physician; response. entered a

c o m p l a i n t as e x h i b i t s i n s u p p o r t o f t h e i r On judgment January in 11, 2012, of trial the trial on court

summary claims.

favor the

Paul

a l l the

Waterses'

Specifically,

court's

judgment s t a t e s :

"[T]he Court i s of the o p i n i o n t h a t the metal p l a t e s as p l a c e d and o b s e r v e d by [ M a t t h e w ] c o n s t i t u t e d an open and o b v i o u s c o n d i t i o n on [ P a u l ] ' s property which [Matthew], i n the e x e r c i s e of reasonable care, s h o u l d have r e c o g n i z e d . A c c o r d i n g l y , f o r t h e r e a s o n s s e t f o r t h i n [ P a u l ] ' s M o t i o n f o r Summary Judgment, t h e m o t i o n f o r summary j u d g m e n t i s h e r e b y g r a n t e d

4

2110683 and t h e C o u r t e n t e r s j u d g m e n t i n f a v o r o f [ P a u l ] on a l l claims." On alter, February amend, 14, or 2012, motion. which 8, 2012, the the trial Waterses trial court filed a motion to On

vacate the The

court's denied

judgment. the

February

Waterses' to our

postjudgment supreme

Waterses

timely

appealed to this

court,

transferred

the

appeal

court

p u r s u a n t t o

Download 2110683.pdf

Alabama Law