WHOLE COURT

N O T IC E : M otions for re c ons i de r a tion m us t be

phy s ic a lly re ce iv e d in our cle r k’s off i c e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

http://w w w .ga a ppe a l s .us /r ule s

M ar ch 10, 2017



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 6 A1 52 1 . FULLER et al . v . M cCORM ICK et al

. A1 6A1 5 2 2

. FULLER v . M cCORM ICK et al

.

M I LLE R , Pres i d i n g J u d g e.

W i l l i am M cCo rm ick was i n ju red wh en a l arg e ro ck fel l fro m th e b u ck et o f t h e

Bo b cat h e was o p erat i ng an d h i t h i s kn ee aft er h e d el i b erat el y p ark ed t h e Bo b cat o n

a s lo p ed s u rface, o v erl oad ed t h e b u c k e t wi t h ro ck s

, an d t h en fu l l y ex t en d ed t h e

Bo b cat ’ s arm t o d u m

p th e ro ck s

. M cCo rm i ck an d h is wi fe su ed Ci n d y Fu l l er, Th o m as

Fu l l er, an d Fu l l St ri d e Farm

, In c. (“ Fu l l St ri d e Farm ”) (co ll ect i v el y

, “ t h e Fu l l ers ” )

,

o n g ro u nd s o f n eg l i g en ce, n eg l i g en ce p er s e, fai l u re t o t r a i n

, fai l u re t o s u p erv i s e,

fai l u re t o m ai nt ai n

, vi cari o u s l i ab i l it y

, an d l o s s of co n s o rt i u m

. 1 Th e Fu l l ers f i l e d

s ep arat e m o t i o n s fo r su m

m ary ju d g m en t

, wh i ch t h e t ri al co u rt d en i ed

. Th e t ri al co u rt

1 Al t h o u g h M cCo rm i ck st at ed i n hi s d ep o s it i o n t h at h e h ad a p en di n g W o rk ers ’

Co m p en s at i o n cl ai m , t h ere i s n o ev i d en ce o f t h i s cl ai m i n t h e reco rd

.g ran t ed a cert i fi cat e o f i m m ed i at e rev i ew, an d t h is Co urt g ran t ed t h e Fu l l ers ’

ap p li cat io n s fo r i nt erl ocu t o ry rev i ew. Aft er a th o ro ug h rev i ew o f th e reco rd

, we

rev ers e t h e d en i al o f th e Fu l lers ’ m o t i o n s fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t b ecau s e M cCo rm i ck

as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f i nju ry as a m at t er o f l aw.

“ On ap p eal fro m t h e g ran t o r d en i al o f s u m m ary ju dg m en t

, we co n d u ct a d e

n o v o rev iew, w i t h al l reas o n ab le i n feren ces co n s t ru ed i n t h e l i gh t m o s t fav o rab l e to

t h e n o n m o v i n g part y .” (Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed .) Ko va cs v. Co r n er s to n e Na t

. In s u r a n ce Co

. ,

3 1 8 Ga. Ap p . 9 9 (7 3 6 SE2 d 1 0 5 ) (2 0 1 2 ).

So v iewed

, t h e ev i d en ce s h o ws t h at

, fro m 1 9 99 t h ro u g h 2 0 1 3

, M cCo rm i ck was

a fu l l -t i m e em

p l o y ee at Fu l l St ri d e Farm

, a s m al l fam i ly e n t e r p r i s e th at was o wn ed

an d ru n b y Ci n d y Fu l l er (“ Ci n d y ”). M cCo rm i ck al so wo rk ed f o r Th o m a s Fu l l er

(“ Th o m as ”) o n a pers o n al b as i s

, ru n n i ng erran d s s u ch as t ak in g o u t t h e t ras h an d

m o w i n g t h e l awn

.

W h en McCo rm i ck fi rs t s t art ed h i s em p l oy m en t at Fu l l St ri d e Farm i n 1 9 9 9

, h e

was as k ed t o u s e a Bo b cat to co m pl et e v ari o u s t as k s o n t h e farm . Th e Bo b cat h ad a

r o o f an d s i de cag es fo r p ro t ect i o n

, an d t h e co ck p i t o f t h e Bo b cat co n tai n ed s e v e r a l

warn i n g s i g n s

, i n c l u d i n g : “ carry l o ad l o w, av oi d s t eep s l o p es an d h ig h s t eep t u rn s

,

n ev er carry m o re t h an 1 7 0 0 p o u n d s,” an d “ av o i d o v ert u rn .” Al t h o u g h th e Fu l l ers

2n ev er fo rm erl y t rai n ed M cCo rm i ck re g a r d i n g h o w t o u s e t h e Bo b cat

, M cCo rm i ck

u s ed th i s Bo b cat o n a reg u l ar b as i s wi t h o u t i n ci den t fo r t h e n ex t t h i rt een y ears

.

On Sep tem

ber 8

, 2 0 12

, t h e Fu l l ers as ked M cCo rm i ck t o u s e t h e Bo b cat to

m o ve l arg e ro ck s

, d i rt

, an d ro ot s fro m a d em o l i t io n s i t e in to th e b ack o f a du m p t ru ck

.

M cCo rm i ck d eci d ed w h ere t o p ark th e d u m p t ru ck an d h o w t o l o ad t he ro ck s fro m t h e

Bo b cat i n t o th e t ru ck

. Sp eci fi cal l y

, M cCo rm i ck d eci d ed to p ark t h e Bo b cat o n l o wer

g ro u nd

, b el o w t h e d u m

p t ru ck

, wh i ch t h en req u ired h i m t o fu l l y ex t en d t he arm o f t h e

Bo b cat t en t o t w el ve feet o ff o f t h e g ro u n d i n o rd er to l o ad t h e ro ck s an d o t h er d eb ri s

i n t o th e t ru ck

. M cCo rm i c k o v e r l o ad ed t h e b u ck et wi t h ro ck s st i ck i n g u p

ap p ro x i m at el y fo u r i n ch es ab o v e t h e ed g e o f t he b u ck et

, ev en th ou g h h e was aware

t h at d oi n g so co ul d cau s e t h e ro ck s t o fal l o u t. A s M cCo rm i ck li ft ed t h e ov erl o ad ed

b u ck et

, i t s t ru ck th e ed g e o f t h e d u m p t ru ck an d o n e o f th e ro ck s t u m b l ed o u t

. Th e

ro ck s t ru ck M cCo rm ick ’ s left k n ee, wh i ch w as s l i g ht l y p ro t ru d i n g ou t fro m t h e fro nt

o f t h e Bo b cat

. As a res u lt o f hi s in j u r ies

, M cCo rm i ck req u i red k n ee rep l acem en t

s u rg ery an d h e h as s u ffered ch ro n i c k n ee p ai n s i n ce t h e acci d en t

.

Cas e No . A1 6 A1 5 2 1

31

. I n C a s e N o

. A1 6 A1 5 2 1

, Ci n d y Fu l l er an d Fu ll St ri d e Farm arg ue t h at t h e

t ri al co u rt erred in d en y i ng t h ei r m o t i o n fo r s um m ary ju d g m en t b ecau se M cCo rm i ck

as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f i nju ry as a m at t er o f l aw. W e ag ree.

“ To reco v er fo r i n

j u ri es [al l eg ed l y ] cau s ed b y an o th er’ s n eg li g en ce, a p l ai n t i ff

m u st s h o w fo u r el em e n t s : a d ut y

, a b reach of t h at d u t y

, cau sat i o n an d d am ag es .”

(Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u a t i o n o m i t t ed .) W eb b v. Da y

, 2 7 3 Ga. Ap p

. 4 9 1

, 4 9 4 (3 ) (6 1 5

SE2 d 5 7 0 ) (2 0 0 5). In hi s co m p l ai n t

, M cCo rm i ck al l eg ed t h at t h e Fu ll ers were

n eg li g en t fo r, am o n g o t her reas o n s , fai li n g t o t rai n h i m o n t h e u s e o f t h e Bo b cat

.

M cCo rm i ck i s co rrect i n so far as it i s wel l-s et t l ed t h at an em pl o y er i s o b l i g at ed

t o t rai n em

p lo y ees o n t h e u s e o f eq u i p m en t an d i t i s u n d i s p u t ed th at M cCo rm i ck d id

n o t k n o w h o w t o us e t h e Bo b cat wh en h e was h i red

, an d t h e Fu ll ers d i d n o t p ro v i d e

an y t r a i n i n g

. 2 See Mo or e v. Du b li n Co t t o n Mi ll s

, 1 2 7 Ga. 6 09 (5 6 SE 8 3 9

, 8 4 2 )

(1 9 0 7). Ho wev er, ev en i f t h e Fu l l e r s b r e a c h ed t hei r d u t y b y fai l i n g t o t rai n

M cCo rm i ck

, he i s n o n et hel es s b arred fro m reco v eri n g i n t o rt b ecau s e h e as s u m ed t h e

ri sk o f i n ju ry as a m at t er o f l aw. See Va u g h n v. Pl ea s en t

, 2 6 6 Ga. 86 2

, 8 6 8 (1 ) (4 7 1

SE2 d 8 6 6) (1 9 9 6) (as s u m p t i on o f t h e ri s k b ars reco v ery o n a n eg l i g en ce cl ai m ).

2 M cCo rm i ck n ev er req u es t ed t rai n i n g an d d i d n o t as k fo r as s i s t an ce b ecau s e

h e as s u m ed t h at i f Ci nd y

, a fem al e, co u l d o p erat e t he Bo bcat , h e co u l d as wel l

.

4(a) Un d er Geo rg i a law, as s u m p t i o n o f t h e ri sk p ro v i d es a co m p let e d efen s e to

l i ab i l i t y an d b ars reco v ery wh ere, “ th e pl ai n t i ff h i m s el f is n eg l i g en t i n s u ch a way t h at

h i s o wn n eg l i g en ce i s t h e s o l e p ro x i m at e cau s e” o f h is i nju ry

. S a p p v. Ef f i n g h a m

C o u n ty Bd

. o f Ed

. , 2 0 0 Ga. Ap p

. 6 95

, 69 6 (1 ) (4 0 9 SE2 d 8 9 ) (1 9 9 1 ). “ Al t h o u g h

as s u m pt i o n of t h e ri s k is o rd i n ari l y a ju ry qu es t io n

, i n p l ai n

, p al pab l e, an d

i n d i s p u t ab l e cas es res o lu t i o n o f t h e i s s ue b y a ju ry is n o t req u i red .” (Ci t at i on s

o m it t ed .) Fo wl er v. Al

ph a r et t a Fa mi l

y S ka t e Ct r

., LLC

, 2 68 G a. A p p

. 32 9

, 3 3 1 (3 )

(6 0 1 SE2 d 8 1 8) (2 0 0 4 ); s ee al s o Ro b i n s o n v. Kr o g er Co

. , 26 8 Ga. 7 3 5

, 7 39 (1 ) (4 9 3

SE2 d 4 0 3) (1 9 9 7) (s u m

m ary ju d g m en t p ro p er i n p l ai n an d p al p ab l e cas es ).

W h en a m o t i o n fo r s u m

m ary ju d g m en t i s p rem i s ed o n t h e affi rm at i ve d efen s e

o f a ss u m p t i o n o f t h e ri s k

, t h e d efen d an t s b ear t h e i n i t i al b u rd en o f pro o f t o co m e

fo rward wi t h ev i d en ce s u ffi ci en t t o es t ab l i s h “ t h at t he p lai n t i f f ( 1 ) h ad act u al

k n o wl ed g e o f th e d an g er; (2 ) u n d ers t o o d a n d ap p reci at ed t he ri sk s as s o ci at ed wi th

s u ch d an g er; an d (3 ) v o l u n t ari l y ex p o s ed hi m s el f t o t h o s e ri s k s.” (Ci t at io n s o m i t t ed .)

Va u gh n

, s u p ra, 2 66 G a

. at 86 4 (1 ); s ee al s o Ch r i s t i a n v. Ea g les La n d i n g Ch r i s t i a n

Aca demy, In c.

, 3 0 3 Ga. Ap p

. 1 1 3 (1 ) (6 9 2 SE2 d 7 4 5 ) (2 0 10 ). In as s es s i n g wh et h er

d efen d an t s h av e m et t h is bu rd en

, we ap p l y a s u b j ect i v e st an d ard “ g e a r ed t o t h e

p art i cu l ar p l ai nt i ff an d h i s si t u at i o n

, r at her t h an t h at o f a reas o n ab l e pers o n o f

5o rd i n ary

p ru d en ce.” (Ci t at i on s an d p u n ct u at i on o m i t t ed .) M u l d ova n v. McEa ch er n

,

2 7 1 Ga. 8 0 5

, 8 0 8 (2 ) (5 2 3 SE2 d 5 6 6 ) (1 9 9 9 ). Here, t h e reco rd cl earl y s h o ws t h at t h e

Fu l l ers h av e m et t h ei r b urd en

.

(i ) McCo r mi ck’s a ct u a l

kn o wl ed g e o f t h e o p en a n d o bvi o u s d

a n g er

“ Kn o wl ed g e o f th e ri s k i s t h e wat ch wo rd o f as s u m p t i o n o f t h e ri s k

, an d m ean s

b o t h a ct u a l an d s u b

j ect i ve kn o wl ed g e o n t h e p l ai nt i ff’ s p a r t.” (Ci t at i o n s an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Id

. at 8 0 8 (2 ). Nev ert h el es s “ [i ] n s o m e c as es

, a p l ai n t i ff’ s

as s u m pt i o n o f t h e ri s k can b e im p l i ed fro m fact s sh o w i n g t h a t h e w as aware o f t h e

ri sk .” Ten n i s on v. Lo wn d es -Ech o l s As s n

. f o r Ret a r d ed Ci t i

z en s

, 2 0 9 Ga. Ap p

. 3 4 3,

3 4 4 (4 3 3 SE2 d 34 4 ) (1 99 3 ) ( p l a i n t i f f a s s u m ed ri s k wh ere h e cl i m b ed o n t o p o f a

p al l et o f l u m

b er po s i t i o n ed o n a fo rk l i ft

, t he l u m b er sh i ft ed wh il e h e was s tan d i n g o n

i t

, an d h e kn ew t h at t h e fo rk l i ft carry i n g t h e l o a d o f l u m b er u p o n wh i ch h e was

s t an d i n g c o u l d t u rn o v er an d cau s e h i m t o fal l ). Th i s is b ecau s e “ [a] pers o n can n ot

u n d ert ak e t o d o wh at i s o bv i o u s l y a d an g ero u s t h i n g an d at t h e s am e t i m e av o i d t h e

res p o n s i b i l i t y fo r th e s el f-as s um ed ri s k .” Fi r s t Pa ci f i c Mg mt

. Co r

p

. v. O’Br i en

, 1 8 4

Ga. Ap p . 2 7 7 , 2 8 1 (3 6 1 SE2 d 2 6 1 ) (1 9 8 7 ).

In th i s cas e, t h e dan g er ari s in g fro m M cCo rm i ck ’ s co nd u ct was ob v i o u s

. Fi rs t

,

M cCo rm i ck h ad act u al kn o wl ed g e o f t h e o p en an d o b v i o u s d an g er cau s ed b y fu l l y

6ex t en d i n g t h e arm o f t h e Bo b cat o v erh ead w h i l e th e b u ck et was o v erl oad e d wi th

h eav y ro ck s

. In deed

, h e ad m i t ted as m u ch i n h is tes t im on y

, wh en h e s t at ed t h at h e

k n ew “ so m et h i n g co u l d h ap p en ” i f h e “ wo rk [ed ] t h e b uck et t hat h i g h .” Seco n d

, n ot

o n l y was t h e l ack o f fro n t cag e p ro t ect i o n t o g uard ag ai n st fal l i n g o b ject s v i s i b l e an d

o b v i o u s

, b u t t h e Bo b cat al s o co n t ai n ed warn i n g s i g n s t hat cau t i on ed M cCo rm i ck

ag ai n s t t he act io n h e u n dert oo k

. See Des a i v. S i l ver Do l l a r Ci t

y, In c.

, 2 29 Ga. Ap p.

1 6 0

, 1 6 5 (3 ) (4 9 3 SE2 d 54 0 ) (1 9 97 ) (s u m m ary ju d g m en t w ar r a n ted wh ere p l ai n t i ff

i g n o red warn i n g s i gn s u n t i l s h e was i n ju red ).

(i i ) McCo r mi ck s u b

j ect i vel y u n d er s t o o d a n d a p p r eci a t ed t h e r i s ks

M cCo rm i ck ad m i t t ed t h at h e s u b ject i v el y ap p reci at ed t h e ri sk o f o v erl o ad i n g

t h e Bo b cat ’ s b u ck et an d fu l l y e x t e n d i n g th e arm i n t h i s m an ner. Aft er u s i n g t h i s

Bo b cat fo r t h i rt een y ears wi t h o u t i n ci d en t

, o n t he d ay o f t h e acci d en t

, M cCo rm i ck

d el i b erat el y ch o s e t o h av e t h e d u m p t ru ck

, wh i ch h ad s i d es wel l -ab o v e t en t o t wel v e

feet o ff o f t h e g ro u n d

, p a r k e d o n t o p o f a t h ree t o fo u r fo o t s l op e. M cCo rm i ck

ad m i t t ed l y kn ew t h at h e w o ul d b e l i ft i n g l arg e an d h eav y ro ck s an d t h at h e

o v erl o ad ed t h e b u ck et wi t h t w o t o fo ur i n ch es o f ro ck v i s i b l e ab o v e t h e ri m

.

M o reo v er, M cCo rm i ck ad m it t ed t h at h e was co ncern ed fo r h i s s afet y wh en h e

ex t en d ed t h e arm o f t h e Bo bcat b u ck e t ab o v e th e h ig h wal l o f t h e d u m p t ru ck

.

7Sp eci fi cal l y

, M cCo rm i ck ad m i t t ed t h at h e k n ew b et t er t h an t o l o ad larg e m ou n d s o f

d i rt an d ro ck t h a t co u ld s t i ck up o v er t h e t o p o f t he b u ck et b ecau s e he real i zed t h at

ro ck s co u l d fal l o ut t h at way

. An d h e st at ed t h at h e was “ n erv o u s” u s i n g t h e Bo b cat

wi t h t h e arm ex ten d ed as h i g h as i t was u nd er t h e ci rcu m s t an ces b ecau s e h e feared

“ s o m et h i n g co u l d h ap p en .”

W h en a p ers on ad m i ts k no wl ed g e o f th e ri s k cau s ed by h i s o w n co n du ct

, even

i f t h e ri s k ma n i

f es t s it s el f d if f er en t l y t h a n h e exp ect ed

, t h at p ers o n h a s a s s u m ed t h e

ri sk o f i n j u r y

. See Kr o g er Co

. v. W i ll i a ms

, 25 7 Ga. Ap p

. 8 3 3

, 8 3 5 (5 7 2 SE2 d 3 1 6 )

(2 0 0 2) (s u m

m ary ju d g m en t p ro p er wh ere t h e p l a i nt i ff was in ju red wh en a p al l et o f

m i l k crat es fel l o n h i m w h i l e h e was as s i st i n g an ot h er em p l o y ee u nl o ad t h e crat es

b ecau s e t h e p lai n t i ff k new t hat m i l k fel l d u ri n g t he u n l o ad i n g pro ces s al l th e t i m e an d

t h u s h e h ad t h e req u i s i t e s u bject i v e k n o wl ed g e).

(i i i ) McCo r mi ck vo l u n t a ri l

y exp o s ed

h ims el f t o t ho s e r i s ks

As n o t ed

, M cCo rm ick d eci d ed w h ere t o p ark t h e d um p t ru ck

, ev en t h o u g h h e

u n d ers t o o d t h at t h i s r e q u i red hi m t o fu l l y ex t en d t h e Bo b cat ’ s arm

. Ad d it i o n al l y

,

M cCo rm i ck ad m i t t ed l y i g n o red war n i n g s ig n s i n t h e cab o f th e Bo bcat i ns t ru ct i n g

u s ers t o “ carry l o ad l ow, av oi d s t eep s l o p es an d h i g h s t eep t u rn s.” M o reo v er, i n h i s

d ep os i t i o n

, M cCo rm i ck ad m i t t ed t h at t h ere was n o m al fu n ct i o n o r p ro b l em wi t h t h e

8Bo b cat t h at cau s ed t h e ro ck t o fal l o u t. Al t h o u g h M c C o r m i ck arg u es t h at h e was

co erced i n t o m o v i n g t he ro ck s i n t h i s m an n er, t h e reco rd refl ect s t h at h e al o n e ch o s e

wh ere t o p ark t h e d u m

p t ru ck an d h o w t o u s e t h e Bo b cat

.

(b ) Th e Fu l l ers h av e t h u s co m e fo rt h wi t h ev i den ce t o sh o w t h at M cCo rm i ck

as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f i nju ry as a m at t er o f l aw o n t h e day o f t h e acci d en t . Th e b u rd en

t h en s h i ft ed t o M cCo r m i c k t o “ co m e fo rward wi t h s o m e ev i d en ce t h at s h o ws a

g en ui n e, d i s p u t ed i s s u e o f fact as t o s o m e el em en t o f t h e affi rm at iv e d efen s e.” Ka n e

v. La nd s ca p e St r uct u r es

, In c.

, 3 0 9 G a

. A p p

. 1 4

, 1 6 -1 7 (7 0 9 SE2 d 8 7 6 ) (2 0 1 1 ).

M cCo rm i ck fai l ed t o m eet t h i s b u rd en o f p ro d uct i o n b ecau s e h e p o i n t ed t o n o t h i n g

i n t he reco rd t o rai s e a g en u in e i s s u e o f fact wi t h reg ard t o h i s as s um p t i o n o f t h e ri s k.

In an affi dav i t s u b m it t ed in res p o n s e t o t h e F u l lers ’ m o ti o n s fo r s u m m ary

ju d g m en t

, M cCo rm i ck s t at ed th at h e h ad nev er u s ed t h e Bo b cat i n t h i s m an n er b efo re,

h e d i d n o t k n o w t h at h e n eed ed t o u s e i t d i fferen tl y , an d h e was u n aware o f t h e ri s k

o f ro ck s fal l i n g o u t . In h i s affi d av i t , M cCo rm i ck fei g n ed i g n o ran ce o f t h e o p en an d

o b v i o u s dan ger. Ho wev er, M cCo rm i ck ad m it t ed i n h is dep o s i t i o n t h at h e k n ew h e

was en g ag ed i n d an g ero u s b e h a v i o r an d th at h e “ h ad en o u g h sen s e t o k n o w” t h at

o v erl o ad i n g a b u ck et o f ro ck s u p h i gh wo u l d cau s e t h e ro ck s t o fal l o n h i m

.

M cCo rm i ck fu rt h er ad m i t ted i n h i s d ep o s i t i o n th at h e k n ew “ s o m et h i ng co u ld

9h ap pen ” i f h e u s ed t h e Bo b cat i n t h e m an n er h e d i d o n th e d ay o f th e acci d en t

.

Nev ert h el es s

, he ad m i tt ed t h at h e l oad ed t h e b u ck et in s u ch a way th at l arg e ro c k s

were s t i ck i n g u p as m

u ch as fo u r i n ch es ab ov e t he ed g e o f t h e b u ck et

, an d t h at h e h ad

t o fu l ly ex t en d t h e Bo b cat ’ s arm o v erh ead t o d u m p t h e co n t en t s o f t h e b u ck et

.

Becau s e M cCo rm i ck ’ s affi d av it d i rect l y co n t rad ict s h i s d ep o s it i on t es ti m o n y wi t h o ut

o fferi n g an y ex p l an at i o n fo r t h e co n t rad i ct i o n

, t h e t ri al co u rt s h o u l d h av e, bu t fai l ed

t o

, d i s co u n t McCo rm i ck ’ s affi dav i t t es t i m o n y u n d er t h e Pr op h ecy ru le. See Ha ywa r d

v. Kr o g er Co

., 3 1 7 Ga. Ap p . 7 9 5 , 7 9 8 -7 9 9 (3 ) (a) (7 33 SE2 d 7 ) (2 0 1 2 ).

Ab s en t McCo rm i ck ’ s s el f-s erv i ng affi d av i t

, M cCo rm i ck h as fai l ed t o p o i n t to

an y ev id en ce t o m eet h i s b u rd en t o d em on s t rat e a gen u i n e i s s u e o f m at eri al fact wi th

res p ect to h i s as s u m

p ti o n o f t h e ri s k

. M cCo rm i ck ’ s v o l u n t a r y d e c i s io n t o l i ft t h e

o v erl o a d e d b u c k e t o f larg e ro ck s h i g h up wh i le o n a sl op e, i n t h e face o f warn i n g

s i gn s

, ev en t h o u g h h e act u al l y an d s u b ject i v el y kn ew a ro ck c o u l d fal l o u t an d h i t

h i m , i s fat al t o h is cl ai m . See Des a i , s u p ra, 2 29 Ga. Ap p . at 1 65 (3 ).

W e reco g n ize t h at t h e m ajo ri t y o f cas es i n t h is Co u rt ad d res s i n g as s u m p t i o n o f

t h e ri s k co n cl u d e t h at th is i s s ue i s b et t er l eft to t h e ju ry

. Ho w ev er, w h ere, as h ere, t h e

i s su e is “ p l ai n, p al p ab le, an d i n d i s p u t ab l e,” s u m m ary j u d gm en t i s a p p ro p ri at e.

Fo wl er

, s u pra, 2 6 8 Ga. A p p. at 3 3 1 ( 3 )

. Th e Fu ll ers h av e m et th ei r b u rd en t o s h o w

10t h at M cCo rm i ck k n o w i n g l y an d v o l u n t ari l y as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f i n ju ry

, an d

M cCo rm i ck h as fai l ed t o m eet hi s b u rd en t o d efeat t h e affi rm a t i v e defen s e o f

as s u m pt i o n o f t h e ri s k

. Acco rd i n g l y

, t h e Fu l l ers are en ti t l ed t o s um m ary ju d g m en t as

a m at t er o f l aw. See, e.g

., S on es v. Rea l Es t a t e Dev. Gr o u p , In c. , 2 7 0 Ga. Ap p

. 5 0 7,

5 0 8 -5 0 9 (1 ) (6 0 6 SE2 d 68 7 ) (2 0 0 4 ) (affi rm in g s u m m ary ju d g m en t b as ed o n

as s u m pt i o n o f t h e ri s k w h e r e w o rk ers were in a wo od en p l at fo rm b ei n g l ift ed b y a

fo rk l ift at n i g ht an d th ey were i nju red wh en th e fo rk l i ft t i l t ed an d k n o ck ed t h em t o t h e

g ro u nd

, an d t h i s Co u rt fo u n d t h at t h ere was an o b v i o u s ri sk t h at t h e p lat fo rm co u ld

m o ve, t h e p l ai nt iff was aware t h at h e was n o t t i ed o ff as a s afet y p recau t io n

, an d t h i s

was t h e s eco n d t i m e t h e p lai n t i ff h ad u sed t h e wo rk p lat fo rm ).

“ It d efi es b o t h l o g i c an d o u r l aw t o p erm i t a reco v ery u n d er t h i s ev i d en ce.”

Des ai

, s up ra, 2 2 9 Ga. Ap p

. 16 5 (3 ). A cco rd i n g ly

, t h e t ri al co u rt erred wh en i t d en i ed

t h e Fu l lers ’ m o t i o n s fo r s u m m ary j u d gm en t o n t h e g ro u n d o f as s u m p ti o n o f t h e ri s k,

an d M cCo rm i ck i s n o t en t i t l ed t o reco v er o n an y o f h i s t o rt cl ai m s

.

2

. M cCo rm ick ’ s wi fe’ s l o s s o f co n so rt i u m cl ai m i s dep en d en t o n her h u s b an d ’ s

ri gh t t o reco v er. Sewel l

, su p ra, 2 1 5 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 1 2 (2 ). H av i n g co ncl u d ed t h at

M c C o r m i ck as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f h i s act i o n s

, h e can n o t reco ver, an d, t h erefo re, hi s

wi fe’ s l o ss o f co n s ort i u m cl ai m fai l s as wel l . Id

.

11Cas e No . A1 6 A1 5 2 2

3

. In l i g h t o f ou r co n cl u s io n i n Di v i s i o n 1 t h at M cCo rm i ck as s um ed t h e ri s k o f

i n ju ry an d t h at t h e Fu l lers were en t i t l ed t o s u m m ary j u d gm en t

, we n eed n o t ad d res s

Th o m as ’ s arg u m en t s as t o cau s at i o n

.

Ju d g men t r ever

s ed

. Br a n ch

, Mer ci er

, R ees e, a n d Bet h el

, J J

. , c onc u r. E llington

,

P. J., Di l l a r d

, P. J., a nd M

cMi l l i an

, J., co n cu r i n j u dg men t o n l y. M cFa d d en

, P

. J

. ,

d i s s en t s

.A1 6 A1 52 1 . FULLER et al . v . M cCORM ICK et al

.

A1 6 A1 52 2 . FULLER v . M cCORM ICK et al

.

M C F A D D E N , Pres id i n g J u d g e, d i s s en t in g

.

I res p ect fu l ly d i s s en t b ecau s e t h is i s n o t a cas e w h ere t he d efen s e o f as s u m p t i o n

o f t he ri s k i s s u s cep t i b l e of su m m ary ad ju d i cat i o n

. An d Th o m as Fu l l er’ s al t ern at e

arg u m en t s fo r s u m

m ary ju dg m en t l ack m eri t

. So I wo u l d affi rm t he t ri al co u rt ’ s d en i al

o f t h e d efen d an t s ’ m o t io n s fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

.

1

. As s u mp t i o n o

f t h e r i s k

.

An as s u m p t i on o f ri s k d efen s e

i s n o t o rd i n ari l y su s cep t i b l e o f s u m m ary ad ju d i cat i o n

, an d s u m m a r y

ju d g m en t i s ap p ro p ri at e o n l y wh ere t h e ev id en ce i s p l ai n, pal p ab le, an d

2i n d i sp u t ab l e. In Geo rg i a, a d efen d an t as s ert i n g an as su m p ti o n o f t h e ri s k

d efen s e m

u s t es t ab l i sh t h at th e p l ai n t i ff (1 ) h ad act u al k no wl ed g e o f th e

d an g er; (2 ) u nd ers t oo d an d ap p reci at ed th e ri s k s as s o ci at e d w i t h s u ch

d an g er; an d (3 ) v o lu nt ari l y ex p o s ed h i m s el f t o t h o s e ri s k s

.

Bi l l s v

. Lo wer

y

, 2 8 6 Ga. Ap p

. 3 0 1

, 3 04 (3 ) (6 4 8 SE2 d 7 7 9) (2 0 0 7 ) (ci t at i o n an d

p u n c t u at i o n o m i tt ed ). T h e d efen d an t m u s t s h o w “ b o th act u al an d s u b ject i v e

k n o wl ed g e o n t h e p l ai n t i ff’ s p art

. Th e k n o wl ed g e t h at a p l ai n ti ff w h o as su m es a ri s k

m u st s u b ject i v el y p o s s es s is th at o f t h e s p eci fi c, p art i cu l ar ri s k o f h arm as s o ci at ed

wi t h t h e act i v i t y o r co n d it i on t h at p ro x i m at el y cau s es in ju ry .” Kr o g er Co

. v. W

i l l i a ms

,

2 5 7 Ga. Ap p . 8 3 3 , 8 3 5 (5 7 2 SE2 d 3 1 6 ) (2 0 02 ) (ci tat i o n o m i t t ed ).

T he m a jo ri t y wo u ld h o ld t h at M cCo rm i ck h ad act u al an d s u b ject i v e k n o wl ed g e

o f t h e p art i cu l ar ri s k t hat cau s ed h i s i n ju ry

— ro ck s fal l i n g fro m t h e b u ck et o f t h e

Bo b cat

— becau s e t h e d an ger was o b v i o u s an d becau s e M cCo rm i ck o v erl o ad ed t h e

b u ck et wi t h ro ck s

, ev en th o u g h h e was aware t h at d o i ng s o co u l d cau se ro ck s t o fal l

o u t

. In fact

, M cCo rm ick s p eci fi cal l y t es t i fi ed t h at

, al t h o u gh h e was aware o f t h e ri s k

o f t h e Bo b cat fal l in g o ver, h e d i d n ot k n ow o f t h e ri s k of t h e h arm t hat i n ju red h i m

.

An d h e s p eci fi cal l y

t es t i fi ed t h at h e d i d n o t o v erl o ad t h e b uck et

.

(a) S p eci f i c kn o wl ed

g e

.

3On t he i s s u e o f M cCo rm i ck ’ s k n o w l ed g e, h e s u bm i t t ed hi s affi dav i t i n wh i ch

h e ex pl i ci t l y tes ti fi ed t h at h e d i d n o t k n o w t hat “ u s i n g t h e Bo b cat t o cl ear l arg e ro ck s

an d ru bb l e an d d um

p i n g i t i n t o a d u m

p t ru ck wi th t h e b u ck et u p hi g h was d i fferen t

t h a n u s i n g i t h o w [h e] h ad u s ed i t b efo re,” t h at “ u s i n g t h e Bo bcat o n a h i l l o r t h a t

d u m p i n g fro m a di fferen t l ev el t h an th e d u m p tru ck n eed ed t o h e d o n e an y di fferen t l y

t h an [h e] h ad d o n e b efo re,” o r t h at “ t h ere was a ri s k t h a t t he ro ck s co u l d fal l o u t o f

t h e b u ck et if t h e Bo b cat was o p erat ed i n t h e m an n er i t was o p erat ed o n t h e dat e o f t h e

i n ci d en t .” He ad d ed t h at h e “ h ad n ev er had an y i t em s fal l ou t of t h e b u ck et wh en [h e]

u s ed th e Bo b cat b efo re.” Th i s i s d i rect ev i d en ce th at M cCo rm i ck l ack ed act u al

k n o wl ed g e o f t he d an g er t h at res u l t ed i n h is i n ju ry an d d i d no t u nd ers t an d o r

ap p reci at e t h e ri s k s as s o ci at ed wi t h s u ch d an g er.

M o re o v er, al t h o u g h McCo rm i ck di d t es ti fy t h at h e w as “ wo rri ed t h at

s o m et h in g co u l d h ap p en

, ” as t h e m ajo ri t y o b s erv es

, h e co n s i s t en t l y ex p lai n ed t h at t h e

d an ger h e was wo rri ed ab o ut was t h e Bo b cat t i p pi n g o v er:

Q. Yo u h ad t h e b u ck et way u p h i g h ?

A.

Yeah . To g et o v er t hat d um p t ru ck

. I h o p e t h i s t h i ng d o n ’ t t u rn o ver.

Q.

Ok ay . Bu t y o u fel t n erv o u s b ecau s e y o u fel t t h at i t was d an g ero u s ?

A.

So m et h in g co u l d h ap p en , y es

, s i r.

4Q.

Di d y o u h av e an y t h o u g ht s ab o u t wh at m i g h t h ap pen ?

A.

Th e s i d e -- Th e s i d e m i g h t t i p o v er o r s o m et h i n g. Ot h er t han t h at , n o

.

. . .

Q.

So y o u k n ew, y o u w ere afrai d s o m et h i n g was g o i n g t o h ap pen b ecau s e i t was

u n s t ab l e, ri g h t ?

A.

I t ho u gh t s o m et h i n g was g o i n g t o h ap p en b ecau s e i t was ex t en d ed o u t h i g h

. Q.

Yo u were afrai d s o m et h i n g was g o i n g to h ap p en becau s e i t was ex t en d ed o ut

h i g h ?

A. Bu t wh at I t h o ug h t wo u l d h ap p en

, I t h o ug h t i t m i g h t t i l t ov er o r

s o m et h i ng . I k n ew i t co u l d n ’ t d o t h at

.

Th e m ajo ri t y wo u ld d i s reg ard M cCo rm i ck ’ s affi d av i t tes t i m on y o n t h e g ro u n d

t h at t h e t ri a l c o u r t s h o ul d h av e d i s co u n t ed i t u n d er Pr o p h ecy v. Ch a r l es Ro s s i

g n o l

,

In c.

, 2 5 6 Ga. 2 7 ( 3 4 3 S E 2 d 6 8 0 ) (1 9 8 6 ). Bu t M cCo rm i ck ’ s t es t i m on y i s n ot

co n trad i ct o ry : i n h is d ep o si t i on M cCo rm i ck t es t i fi ed th at h e was co n cern ed t h at t h e

Bo b cat wo u ld t i l t o v er; i n h i s affi d av i t h e t es ti fi ed t h at h e d i d n o t k n o w o f t he ri s k o f

ro ck s fal l i n g ou t o f t h e Bo b cat ’ s b u ck et

. Tes t i m o n y “ i s co n t rad i ct o ry i f o n e p art o f t h e

t es t i m o ny as s er t s o r e x p res s es t h e o p p o s i t e o f an o t h er p art of t h e t es ti m o n y .”

Pr o ph ecy

, 2 5 6 Ga. at 3 0 (2 ). Here, “ [t ] h ere i s no rel ev an t co n t rad i ct i o n to b e res o l v ed

,

5an d t h e Pr o

p h ecy ru l e h as n o b eari n g o n t h e q u es t i o n of” w het h er M cCo rm i ck k n ew

o f t h e ri s k o f ro ck s fal li n g fro m t h e b u c k e t

. Pi er r e v. S t

. Ben ed i ct ’s E p i s co p a l Da y

S ch oo l

, 3 2 4 Ga. Ap p

. 2 8 3, 2 8 9 (3 ) (7 5 0 SE2 d 3 7 0 ) (2 0 1 3 ). So t h ere i s n o b as i s fo r

d i s reg ard i n g t he on l y d i rect ev i d en ce o f M cCo rm ick ’ s k no wl ed g e o f t h e ri s k t h at

i n ju red h i m

. “ Co n s eq u en t l y

, s u m m ary ju dg m en t fo r [t h e d efen d an t s i s ] n o t warran t ed

o n t h i s b as i s .” Bi l l

s , 2 8 6 Ga. Ap p . at 3 0 4 (3 ).

Th e m ajo ri ty ci t es Kr o ger

, s u p ra, 2 5 7 Ga. Ap p

. at 8 3 5

, fo r t h e p ro p o s i t i o n t h at

wh en a p ers o n ad m it s k n o wl ed g e o f t h e ri sk cau s ed b y hi s o w n co n d u ct

, ev en i f t h e

ri sk m an ifes ts i t s el f d i fferen t ly t h an h e ex p ect ed

, t h at p ers o n h as as su m ed t he ri s k o f

i n ju ry

. Bu t i n Kr o ger

, t he p l ai n ti ff ad m i t t ed k n owl ed g e o f t h e s p eci fi c ri s k t hat cau s ed

h i s i n ju ry

. Th ere, th e p l ai n t i ff, a d el i v ery d ri v er, was i n ju red wh en

, w h i l e as s i s t i n g a

s t ore em p l o y ee u n l oad a p al let o f m i l k crat es fro m h i s tru ck

, t h e crat es fel l o n t h e

p l ai n t i ff. Id

. at 8 3 4

. Th e p lai n t i ff “ ack n o wl ed g ed h e was aware t h at m i l k fel l d u ri n g

t h e u n l o a d i n g p ro ces s ‘ al l t h e t i m e,’ ” an d th at o n e cau s e was “ ‘ l i k e t h e cas e wi th

[h i m ] wh en t h e crat e g et s cau g ht o n th e d o ck p lat e.’ ” Id

. He had ev en co m p l ai n ed to

h i s su p erv is o r ab o u t t h e s t o re’ s em p l o y ees “ n o t k n o w i n g h o w t o o p erat e t h e p al l et

jack [] ” t h at cau s ed t h e crat es t o fal l o n h i m . Id

. at 8 3 5. An d i n Kr og er , we rep eat ed

o u r l o n g -s t an d i n g req u i rem en t t h at fo r as s u m p t i o n o f t he ri sk t o ap p l y

,

6t h e k n o wl ed g e t h at a p lai n t i ff

. . . m u s t s u bject iv el y p o s s es s i s th at o f th e

s p eci f i c, p ar t icu l a r r i s k o

f h a r m a ss o ci a t ed wi t h t h e act i vi ty o r co n d i t i o n

t h a t p r o xi ma t el

y ca u se s i n

j u r y

. Th e k n o wl ed g e req ui rem en t d oes n o t

refer t o a p l ai n t i ff’ s co m

p reh en s i o n o f g en eral

, n o n-s p eci fi c ri s k s t hat

m i g h t b e as so ci at ed wi t h s u ch co n d i t i o n s o r act i vi t i es

.

Id

. (ci t at i on o m i t t ed ; em

p has i s ad d ed ). See al s o V

au g hn v. Pl ea s en t

, 2 6 6 Ga. 8 6 2

, 8 6 4

(1 ) (4 7 1 SE2 d 8 6 6 ) (1 9 9 6 ) (s am e); Tr u s t ees o f Tr i n i t y Co l l eg e v. Fer r i s

, 2 2 8 Ga. Ap p.

4 7 6 , 4 7 9 (3 ) (4 9 1 SE2 d 9 09 ) (1 9 9 7 ) (s am e).

(b ) Over l o a d i n g

o f t h e b u cket

.

C o n t rary t o t h e m ajo ri t y

, M cCo rm ick tes t ifi ed t h at h e d i d no t o verl o ad t h e

b u ck et wi t h ro ck s, b ecau s e h e wan t ed t o av o i d t h e ri s k o f ro ck s fal l i n g:

Q. Ho w h i g h was t h e l o ad o f ro ck an d s uch t h at were i n t h e b u ck et

wh en t h i s ro ck cam e o ff an d h i t y o u ?

A. I wo u l d s ay i t was n ’ t l ev el

, wi t h t he ro ck s t i ck i ng u p m ay b e fo u r

i n ch es t al l o r s om et h i n g

. Q.

So wh en y o u l o a d e d i t u p

, . . . y o u h ad ch os en t o g et a l o ad o f ro ck t h at was

s t ick in g u p m ay

b e fo u r i n ch es o v er t h e l ev el o f t h e b u ck et ?

A.

No

. If i t was l ev el

, t he en d o f i t m i g h t h av e b een s ti c k i n g u p l i k e t h at

, b u t I

d i d n ’t h a ve a b i g mo u nd o f d i r t o r n o th i n g o ver

t h e t o p o f t h e b u cket

b eca u s e I h a d

en o ug h s en s e t o kn o w t h a t wh en I d u mp ed t h a t i t wo u l d ’ve f

al l en o n me.

Q.

Th at ’ s wh at I’ m t ry i n g t o fi n d o u t

. W as t h e l o ad t h at y o u h ad l ev el wi t h t h e t o p

o f t h e b u ck et o r was a ro ck o r t wo s t i ck i n g u p a few i n ch es ab o e t h e b u ck et ?

A.

7A r o ck o r t wo wa s st i cki n g u p a f ew i n c h e s a b o v e i t h o n es t l y, b u t th e wh o l e

l o a d wa s n ’t s t i cki n g u p . Y o u kn o w, i t

wa sn ’t a mo u n d o ver i t

.

As t h e m ajo ri t y wri t es an d t h i s t es t i m o n y dem on s t rat es

, M cCo rm i ck ad m i t t ed t h at h e

s u b ject i vel y ap p reci at ed t he ri s k o f o v erl o ad i n g t h e Bo b cat ’ s b u ck et

, b ut t h e m ajo ri t y

p o i n t s t o n o reco rd ev i den ce t h at M cCo rm ick d i d

, i n fact

, o v erl o ad t h e b u ck et

. Th ere

i s n o b as i s fo r co n cl u d i n g t h at M c C o rm i ck o verl o ad ed t h e bu ck et

, g i v en h i s

u n d i s p u t ed t es ti m on y t h at h e “ d i d n ’ t h av e a b i g m o u nd o f d i rt or n ot h i n g ov er t h e t o p

o f t h e b u ck et ” an d t h at a “ ro ck o r t wo was s t ick i ng u p a few i n ch es ab ov e [t h e b u ck et ]

h o n es t l y , b u t t he wh ol e l o ad was n ’ t s t i ck i n g u p .” .

Th e ev i d en ce o f McCo rm i ck ’ s as s u m p ti o n o f t h e ri sk is n o t p l ai n, p al p ab l e, an d

i n d i s p u t ab l e. So t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t err b y den y i n g t he defen d an t s ’ m o t i o n fo r

s u m m ary ju d g m en t o n t h i s g ro u n d

.

2

. Th o ma s Fu l l er ’s o t h er a r g u men t s.

T h o m as Fu l l er arg u es t h at h e di d n o t b reach a d u ty to M cCo rm i ck ; t h a t

M cCo rm i ck b reach ed hi s own affi rm at i v e d u t y t o en s u re h i s o w n s afet y ; an d t h at n o

act o f Th o m as Fu l ler’ s cau s ed t h e acci d en t

. No n e o f t h es e arg um en t s en t i t l es Th o m as

Fu l l er t o s u m

m ary ju d g m en t

.

(a) Du t y o f ca r e

.

8Th o m as Fu l l er arg u es th at h e o wed no d u t y o f care to M cCo rm i ck b ecau s e o n

t h e d ay o f t h e acci d en t

, M cCo rm i ck ’ s jo b was t o cl ear d eb ri s fro m a d em o l i t i o n si t e

an d t h e d u t y o f o rd i n ary care d o es n o t ap p l y t o co n s t r u c t i o n o r d em o l i t i o n s i t es

.

Un d er OCGA § 3 4-7 -2 0 , an em p l o y er

i s bo u nd t o ex erci s e o rd i n ary care

. . . i n fu rn i s h i n g m ach i n ery eq u al i n

k i n d t o t h at i n gen eral u s e an d rea s o n ab ly s afe fo r al l p ers on s wh o

o p erat e i t w i th o rd i n ary care an d d i l i g en ce. If t h ere are l at en t d efect s i n

m ach i n ery or d an g ers i nci d en t t o an em p lo y m en t

, wh i ch d efect s o r

d an g ers t h e em

p l o y er k no ws o r o u g h t t o k n ow b u t wh i ch are u n k no wn

t o t h e e m p lo y ee, t h en t h e em

p l o y er s h al l g i v e th e em

p l o y ee warn i n g

wi t h res p ect t h eret o

.

OCGA § 3 4 -7 -2 0

.

Th o m as Fu l l er ci t es El

s b er r y v. Ivey

, 2 0 9 Ga. Ap p

. 6 2 0 (4 3 4 SE2 d 1 5 8 ) (1 9 9 3 ),

a p rem i s es l i ab il i t y cas e, fo r t h e p ro p o s i t i on th at t h e d u t i es o f OCGA § 3 4 -7 -2 0 d o n ot

ap p ly t o em

p l o y ees o n co n s t ru ct i o n o r d em o li t i o n si tes

. In El s b er r y

, t h e pl ai nt i ff was

i n ju red wh i l e en g ag ed i n t h e d em o l i t i o n o f a ro o f, wh i ch

, as t h e wo rk p ro g res s ed

,

creat ed d an g er o f wh ich t h e p l ai n t i ff k n ew o r wh i ch h e s h o u l d h av e an ti ci p at ed

. W e

h el d t h at b ecau se t h e p l a i n t i f f w as h i red fo r t h e ex p res s p u rp o s e of as s i s t i n g in

d em o l it i o n

, an d t h e u n safe co n d i t i o n s fro m wh i ch h i s in ju ry res u l ted “ aro s e fro m o r

were in ci d en t al t o t h e wo rk u n d ert ak en b y h i m ,” t h e g en eral ru l e t hat an o wn er o r

9o ccu pi er o f l a n d h a s a d u t y t o k eep h i s p rem i s es s afe fo r wo rk ers d i d n o t ap p l y

. Id

.

at 6 2 1 (2 ) (b ). An d we n ot ed

, “ [t ] h e s erv an t co u l d n o t h av e en g ag ed i n t h e wo rk

wi t h o u t kn o wi n g a n d s eei n g

. . . t h e id en t i cal co n d it i on wh ich

, as g ro u n d s o f

n eg li g en ce, i t i s al l eg ed t h at t h e m as t er al lo w ed t o ex i s t .” Id

. at 6 2 2 (2 ) (c) (ci t at i o n

an d p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

Here, M cCo rm i ck was en g ag ed in cl ean i n g u p a f t er d em o l i t i o n

, n o t as s i s t i n g

i n dem ol i t i o n ; hi s cl ean -u p wo rk was n o t m ak i n g t h e p rem i ses l es s s afe as t h e wo rk

p ro g res s ed

, u n l i ke th e d em o li t io n wo rk o f t h e pl ai n ti ff i n El s b er r y ; an d h e t es t i fi ed

t h at h e di d n o t un d ers t an d t h e ri s k

. Th e o t h er cas e ci t ed b y Th om as Fu l l er, H o wel l v.

Fa r m er s Pea n u t Ma r

ket o f S o weg a , 2 1 2 Ga. A p p

. 61 0 (4 4 2 SE2 d 9 0 4) (1 9 9 4 ), al s o

was a p rem i s es l i ab i l i t y cas e i n w h i c h t h e pl ai n t i ff was i n ju red wh i l e as s i s t i n g in

co n st ru ct i o n

. Bo t h cas es are d i s t in g u i s h ab l e an d nei t her s u p p o rt s Th om as Fu l l er’ s

arg u m en t t h at h e o wed M cCo rm i ck n o d u t y

.

(b ) Du t y t o en s u r e h i s o wn s a

f et y.

Th o m as F u l l e r arg u es t h at h e i s en ti t led to s u m m ary j u d gm en t b ecau s e

M cCo rm i ck fai l ed “ t o o b serv e an d p ro t ect h im sel f fro m v i s i b l e an d m an i fes t d efect s

wh i ch ex i s t[ed ] i n h i s w o rk en v i ro n m en t .” Th i s i s s i m pl y res t at i n g t he as s ert i o n t h at

M cCo rm i ck as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f i n ju ry

. See Ca rt er v. Co u n t ry Cl u b o f Ro s wel l

, 3 0 7

10Ga. Ap p

. 3 4 2

, 3 4 6 (7 0 5 SE2 d 1 7 0 ) (2 0 1 0 ). An d as d e t a i l e d a b o v e, wh et h er

M cCo rm i ck as s u m ed t h e ri sk o f i n ju ry i s a q ues t i o n fo r ju ry

res o l u ti o n

.

(c) Ca u s a t i on

.

Fi n al l y

, Th o m as Fu l l er arg u es t h at h e is en t i t l ed t o s u m m ary ju d g m en t b ecau s e

M cCo rm i ck h as fai l ed t o po i n t t o ev i den ce o f a cau s al co n nect i o n bet ween Th o m as

Fu l l er’ s co nd u ct an d M cCo rm ick ’ s i n j u ry

. Bu t M cCo rm ick p o i n t s to Ci n d y Fu l l er’ s

d ep os i t i o n i n wh i ch s h e t es t i fi ed t h at t h e i n ci d en t o ccu rred b ecau s e M cCo rm i ck was

u s i n g t h e Bo b cat n eg li g en t ly . Th at t es t i m o n y , h e arg u es

, al l o ws t he co n cl us i o n t h at

i f t h e d efen d an ts h ad t rai n ed h i m pro p erl y

, he wo ul d n o t h av e u s ed th e Bo b cat

n eg li g en t l y

, an d h e wo u ld n o t hav e b een i n ju red

. He al s o p o i n t s t o ev i d en ce t h at t h e

d efen d an t s co ul d h av e pro vi d ed a s creen t o p rev en t o b j ect s fro m en teri n g t h e co ck p i t

,

t h ereb y prev en t in g h i s i n

ju ry

. So Th om as Fu l l er h as n o t s h o w n t h at he i s en t i t l ed to

s u m m ary ju d g m en t fo r l ack of ev i d en ce of cau s at i o n

. See Co wa r t v. W i d en er

, 2 8 7 Ga.

6 2 2

, 6 2 8 (2 ) (b ) (6 9 7 SE2 d 7 79 ) (2 01 0 ) (“ In t h e t o rt co n t ex t

, p ro x im a t e c a u s a t i o n

i n cl u d es al l o f t h e n at u ral an d p ro b ab l e co n s e q u en ces o f t h e t o rt feas o r’ s

n eg li g en ce[.] ”).

11As t h e d efen dan t s h av e n o t s h o w n t h at t h ey are en ti t led t o su m m ary ju d g m en t

b ecau s e M cCo rm ick as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f i nju ry an d b ecau s e n on e o f T h om as Fu l l er’ s

al t ern at e arg u m en t s en t i tl e h i m t o s u m m ary ju d g m en t

, I wo u l d affi rm t he tri al co u rt

.

12