SECOND DI VI SI ON

A NDREWS, P. J.

, M C F A D DEN and RA

Y, JJ.

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

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic 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 ls .us /r ule s /

Nov em ber 3, 2014



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 4 A0 98 1

. SW OPE v. GR E E NBRIAR M ALL LIM ITED

PARTNERSHIP et al

.

M C F A D D E N , J u d g e.

M i ch ael J un i el fi l ed a p rem i s es l i ab i l i t y act i o n fo r i nju ri es s u s t ai n ed wh en h e

was s h o t d u ri n g an arm ed ro b b ery wh i l e wo rk i n g as a secu ri t y g uard at a m al l

. Th e

t ri al co u rt g ran t ed s u m

m a r y ju d g m en t t o t h e m al l o wn ers h i p an d m an ag em en t

d efen d an t s o n t he g ro u n d o f as su m p t i o n of t h e ri s k

. M at t h ew Swo p e, t h e

ad m i n is t rat o r o f J u n i el ’ s es tat e, ap p eal s

. 1 Becau s e t h ere ex is t no g en u i n e i s s u es o f

m at eri al fact , we affi rm

.

1 J un i el di ed d uri n g t h e pen d en cy of t h e act i on

, an d Swo p e was su b st i t u t ed as

a p art y

. T h e reco rd s h o ws th at t h e s h o o t i n g o ccu rred i n March 2 00 7

, J un i el fi l ed s u i t

i n M arch 2 00 9

, a s u g g es t i o n o f d eat h was fi l ed i n D ecem b er 2 0 11

, an d a m ot i o n fo r

s u b s t i t u t io n o f p art y

was fi l ed i n M ay

2 0 12

.Su m

m ary ju d g m en t is p ro p er wh en t h ere i s n o gen u i n e i s s u e o f m a t e ri al fact

an d t h e m o v an t i s en ti t l ed t o ju d g m en t as a m at t er o f l aw. OCGA § 9 -1 1 -5 6 (c). On

ap p eal fro m t h e g ran t o f a m o t io n fo r s u m m ary j u d gm en t

, we rev i ew th e ev i d en ce d e

n o v o

, an d co n s t ru e al l reas o n ab l e co n cl u s io n s an d i nferen ces fro m t h e ev i d en ce i n t h e

l i gh t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e n on m o v an t

. Jo n es v. Ba r ro w

, 3 0 4 G a. Ap p

. 3 3 7 (6 9 6 SE2 d

3 6 3 ) (2 0 1 0 ).

So co n s t ru ed

, t he ev i d en ce s h o ws t hat IPC In t ern at i o nal Co r p o r at i o n

, an

i n d ep en den t s ecu ri t y co n tract o r, hi red J u n i e l t o w o rk as a “ p u b l i c s afet y o ffi cer” at

Green b ri ar M al l i n At l an t a. Ju n i el was res po n si b l e fo r p ro v i d i n g p u bl i c s afet y

s erv i ces at t h e m al l

, p at ro l l i n g t h e p ro p ert y an d d et erri n g cri m i nal act i v i ty

. On M arch

3 1

, 2 0 0 7

, J u ni el arri v ed fo r wo rk at 5 : 0 0 p

. m

., an d was as s ig n ed b y h is s up erv i s or to

p at ro l a p ark i n g lo t area o f t h e m al l

. As J u n i e l w a l k ed t h ro ug h t h e m al l t o h i s

as s i g n ed p o s t

, h e s aw s ev eral m as k ed m en near a jewel ry s t o re an d ap p ro ach ed t h em

.

On e o f t h em h ad a gu n an d ai m ed i t t o ward a m al l p at ro n

. Ju n iel in t er v e n e d i n t h e

co n fro n tat io n

, co v eri n g t h e p at ro n ’ s b o d y wi t h h is o wn i n an at t em p t t o s hi el d h i m

fro m t h e g u n s h o ts

. Bo t h Ju n i el an d t h e p at ro n su ffered b u l l et wo u nd s i n t h e s h o o t i n g.

Th e m as k e d m en t hen en t ered t h e jewel ry s to re, s h o t a secu ri t y g u ard i n t h e s t o re,

s m as h ed t h e co u n t er, s t o l e jewel ry , an d fl ed fro m t h e m al l.

2J u n i el fi l ed a p rem i s es li ab i li t y act i o n ag ai n st Green b ri ar M al l (2 0 0 6 ) Li m i t ed

Part ners h i p

, H en d o n Pro pert i es

, LLC, Hen d o n Pro pert y M an ag em en t

, LLC an d

O’ Leary Part ners

, In c. (co l l ect iv el y t h e “ Green b ri ar M al l d efen d an t s ”), cl ai m i n g t h at

n eg li g en t m an ag em en t an d pat ro l o f t h e m al l had pro x i m at el y cau s ed h i s i n ju ri es

. Th e

t ri al co u rt g ran t ed s u m

m ary ju d g m en t t o t h e Green b ri ar M al l d efen d an t s o n t h e b as i s

o f as s u m p ti o n o f t h e ri s k, c o n cl u d i n g t h at “ reco v ery i s p recl u d ed b ecau s e t h e ri s k

[J u n i el ] en co u nt ered was o n e i n h eren t i n h i s j o b as a u n ifo rm ed p u b l ic s afet y o ffi cer.”

Th i s ap p eal fo l l o wed

.

1

. As s u mp t i o n o

f t h e r i s k.

Th e Green b ri ar M al l d efen d an t s as s ert th at t h e t r i a l c o u rt co rrect l y g ran t ed

s u m m ary ju d g m en t b as ed o n t h e d o ct ri n e o f as s u m p t i o n o f t he ri s k . W e ag ree.

T h e g e n e r al ru l e i s t h at wh ere o n e v o l u n t ari l y an d k n o wi n g l y t ak es a

ri sk i n v o l v i n g im

m i n e nt da nger, h e is p recl u d ed fro m reco v ery b y reas o n

o f an o t h er’ s n eg li g en ce. Th e d efen s e of as s u m pt i o n o f ri s k req u i res : (1 )

t h at t h e p l a i n t i ff h ad s o m e act u al k n o wl ed ge of t h e d an g er; (2 ) t h at he

u n d ers t o o d an d ap p reci at ed t h e r i s k t h erefro m [; ] an d (3 ) t h at he

v o l u n t ari l y ex p os ed h i m s el f t o s uch ri s k

. St at ed an o th er way : T he

d o ct ri n e o f t h e as su m

p t i on o f t h e ri s k o f d an g er ap p l i es o n l y wh ere th e

p l a i n t i f f

, wi t h a fu l l ap preci at i o n o f t he d an g er i n v o l v ed an d wi t h o u t

res t ri ct i o n fro m h i s freed o m o f ch o i ce ei t h er b y t h e ci rcu m s t an ces o r b y

co erci o n

, d el i b erat el y ch o o s es an o b v i o u sl y p eri l o u s co u rs e o f co n d uct

s o t h at i t can b e s ai d as a m at t er o f law h e h as as s u m ed al l ri s k o f in ju ry

.

3Ba ker v. Ha r co n

, In c., 3 0 3 Ga. Ap p

. 7 4 9

, 7 5 4 (b ) (6 9 4 SE2 d 6 7 3 ) (2 0 10 ) (ci tat i o n an d

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

In t h i s c as e, t h e u n d is p u t ed ev i d en ce s h o ws th at J u n i el fu l l y ap p reci at ed t h e

d an ger i n v o l v ed

, y et d el i berat el y ch os e t h e o b v i o u s l y p eri l o us co u rs e o f co n d u ct o f

p u t t i ng h i m sel f i n t h e arm ed ro b b er’ s l i n e o f fi re. As J u n i e l a ck n owl ed g ed

, h e

i n t en t i o n al l y p u t h i m s el f in h arm ’ s way an d “ b ecam e a h u m an s h i el d b y co v eri n g t h e

p at ro n ’ s b o d y i n an at t em p t t o d efl ect an d recei v e as m u c h o f t h e bu l l et w ou n d s as

p o s s i b l e.” Becau s e J u n i el v ol u n t ari l y an d kn o wi n g ly t o o k a ri s k i n v ol v i n g i m m i n en t

d an ger o f b ei n g s h o t

, h e i s p recl u d ed fro m reco v ery u n d er th e as s u m pt i o n o f t h e ri s k

d o ct ri n e.

Swo p e arg u es th at ev en i f J u n i el as s u m ed t he sp eci fi c ri s k o f b ei n g s ho t

, he i s

n o t p recl u d ed fro m reco v ery pu rs u an t t o t h e res cu e d o ct ri n e. Ho w e v e r

, t h e res cu e

d o ct ri n e d o es n o t ap p l y

i n t hi s cas e.

Th e res cu e d o ct ri n e ap p l i es wh en t h e d efen d an t s ’ n eg l ig en t act s

o r o m i s si o n s h av e c r e a t ed a co n d it i on o r s i t u at i o n wh i ch i n vo l v es

i m m i n en t an d urg en t p eri l t o l i fe an d p ro p ert y

. In s u ch i n st an ces

, t h o s e

n eg l ig en t act s o r o m i ss io n s are al s o n eg l ig en t i n rel at i o n s h i p t o al l o t hers

wh o

, i n t h e ex erci s e o f o rd i n ary car e f o r t h ei r o wn s afet y u n der th e

ci rcu m s t an ces

, at t em

p t t o res cu e t h e en d an g ered li fe o r p ro p e r t y b y

reas o n ab l y ap p ro p ri at e m ean s

. Th e do ct ri n e of res cu e n eces s ari l y

co n t em p l at es an as s u m

p t i o n o f t h e ri s k i nh eren t i n t he p eri l creat ed b y

4t h e d efen d an t s ’ n eg l i gen ce. Bu t t h e r es cu e do ct r in e wo u ld a p pl y o n l y i f

[ t he p la i n t i ff ] wer e a ct i ng

s i mp l y a s a vo l un t eer

, o r b ys t a n d er

.

Gr i n er v. Geo r

g i a Fa r m Bu rea u Mu t

. In s

. Co

. , 2 6 6 Ga. Ap p

. 28 9

, 2 9 2 (2 ) (5 9 6 SE2 d

7 5 8 ) (2 0 04 ) (ci t at i o ns an d p u n ct u at i o n om i t t ed

, em ph as i s s up p li ed ). See al s o W a l ker

Ha u l i n g Co

. v. Jo h n s o n

, 1 1 0 Ga. Ap p

. 6 2 0

, 6 2 3 (1 39 SE2 d 4 96 ) (1 9 6 4 ) (res cu e

d o ct ri n e ap p l i ed t o v ol u n t eer wh o h el p ed fi g h t a fi re).

P r e t e r m i t t i ng t h e q u es t i o n o f wh et h er J u n i el ex erci s ed o rd i n ary care fo r h i s

o w n s afet y u n d er t h e ci rcu m s t an ces i s t h e fact t h at h e was n o t act i ng s i m p l y a s a

v o l u n t eer o r b y s t an der. Rat h er, t h e u n d i s p u t ed ev i d en ce s h o w s t h at t h e o n l y reas o n

J u n i el was o n t h e s cen e was t h at h e w as on d u t y as a secu ri t y g u ard o r p u b l i c s afet y

o f f i c e r

. S i n ce J u n i el act ed i n h i s cap aci t y as a s ecu ri t y o ffi cer, t h e res cu e d o ct ri n e

d o es n o t ap p l y

, an d i n s t ead t h e as s u m p t i o n o f t h e ri s k d o ct ri ne co n tro l s

. In d eed

, “ [t ] h e

s t ren gt h o f t h e as s um

p t i o n o f ri s k d o ct ri ne to pers o n s em p l o y ed i n s ecu ri t y is s h o wn

i n At l a n t a Br a ves v. Les l i e

, 1 9 0 Ga. Ap p

. 4 9 ( 3 7 8 SE2 d 1 3 3) (1 9 8 9 ).” M a r t i n v.

Ga i th er

, 2 1 9 Ga. Ap p . 6 4 6 , 6 4 9 (4 6 6 SE2 d 6 2 1 ) (1 9 9 5).

In At l a n t a B r a ves

, as i n t h e i n s t an t cas e, th e p l ai nt i ff was o n t h e d efen d an t s ’

p rem i s es wo rk i n g i n h i s cap aci t y as a s ecu ri t y g u ard wh en h e was s h o t b y an arm ed

ro b b er. In award i n g s u m

m ary ju d g m en t t o th e d efen d an ts i n th at cas e, t h i s co u rt h el d:

5Th e po s s i b i l i ty o f a face-t o -face en co un t er wi t h a cri m i n al i s an ord i n ary

an d o b v i ou s ri s k in ci d en t t o em p l o y m e n t a s an arm ed s ecu ri t y g u ard

. Acco rd i ng l y

, as a m at t er o f l aw, [p lai n t i ff]

, b y accep t i n g em p l o y m en t as

[a] s ecu ri ty g uard

, as s u m ed t h e ri s k th at h e wo u l d h av e su ch en co u n t ers

o n t h e s t a d i u m prem is es

. [Pl ai n t i ff] was

, i n effect

, h i red t o p ro vi d e an

el em en t o f t h e v ery

s ecu ri t y t h at h e al l eg es was n eg l i g en tl y l ack in g

.

At l a n t a Br a ves , 1 90 GaAp p . at 5 0 (1 ).

W h i l e J u n i el was n o t arm ed

, t h e s am e rat i o nal e ap p l i es t o h i s em p l o y m en t as

a p ub l i c s ecu ri t y o ffi cer at t he m al l

. He ack n o wl ed g ed as m u ch i n h i s d ep o s i t i o n,

t es t i fy i ng t hat h e was aware th at i n h i s cap aci t y as a s ecu ri t y o ffi cer h e co u l d h av e a

face-t o -face en co u n t er wi th a cri m i n al wh il e o n d u t y an d p o ss i b ly s u ffer i n ju ry

. He

h ad wo rk ed fo r m an y y ears i n s ecu ri t y

, an d tes t ifi ed

, am o n g o t her t h i ng s

, t h at “ wh en

y o u wo rk as a s ecu ri t y o ffi cer, fo r s u re t h ere’ s a ch an ce t h at y o u m ay en co u n t er s o m e

cri m i n al act i v i ty

, reg ard l es s o f w h ere i t i s .” In d eed

, as an ex am p l e o f s u ch en co u n t ers

,

J u n i el n ot ed t h at ap p ro x i m at el y a y ear p ri or t o th e s ho o t i n g i n t h i s cas e, h e was o n

s ecu ri t y du t y at t h e m a l l wh en h e t ri ed t o d et ai n a s u s pect ed s h o p l i ft er, an d h ad h i s

h an d s l iced b y t h e s u s p ect wi t h a p ai r o f s ci s s ors

. T h u s

, J u n i el was fu l l y aware o f t h e

d an gers as s o ci at ed wi t h h i s s ecu ri t y w o rk an d as s u m ed th e ri s k o f i n ju r y t h at h e

s u ffered

.

6Nev ert h el es s

, Swo p e arg u es t h at Ju n i el ’ s at t em p t t o p ro t ect th e s to re p at ro n

ex ceed ed t h e s co p e o f h i s em p lo y m en t du t i es

, w h i c h r eq u i red o n ly t hat h e o b s erv e

an d rep o rt th e i n ci d en t

, an d h e t hu s b ecam e a v o l u n t eer as co n tem pl at ed b y t h e res cu e

d o ct ri n e. W h il e Swo p e h as no t ci t ed an y Geo rg i a cas es d i rect ly o n p o i nt

, we n o t e t h at

a cas e fro m an o t h er ju ri s d i ct i on h as reject ed t h e s am e arg u m en t i n a s i m i l ar co n t ex t ;

an d we fi n d t h e an al y s is in t h at cas e p ers u as i v e. In Rea d v. Keyf a u ver

, 30 8 P.3 d 1 1 8 3

(Ari z. Ap p . 2 0 13 ), a l aw en fo rcem en t o ffi cer was i n ju red wh en h e wen t b ey o n d h i s

em pl o y m en t d u t i es at t h e s cen e o f an au to m o b i l e acci den t b y ex t ri cat i n g t h e d ri v er

fro m t h e v eh i cl e. Id

. at 1 1 85 -1 1 8 6

. In ch al l en g i n g th e g ran t o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t to

t h e d ri v er o n t h e o ffi cer’ s cl ai m o f n eg l i g e n ce, t h e o ffi cer arg u ed t h at b ecau s e h i s

ex t ract io n o f t h e dri ver ex cee d ed t h e s co p e o f h is em p l o y m en t d ut i es

, wh i ch o n l y

req u i red h i m t o secu re an d i nv es t i g at e t h e acci d en t s cen e, he b ecam e a v o lu n t eer an d

co u ld reco v er d am ag es u n d er t h e res cu e d o ct ri n e. Id

. at 1 1 87 -1 1 8 8. Ho w ev er, t h e

co u rt ru l ed t h at i t was n o t pers u ad ed b y t h e arg u m en t t h at t h e offi cer’ s co n du ct t u rn ed

h i m i n t o a v o l u n t eer b ecau s e t h e cri t i cal q u es t i o n was n o t h i s co n d u ct a t t h e s c e ne,

b u t was w h e t h e r h e was “ o n t h e s cen e as a res u l t of h is on -d u t y o bl i g at i o ns .” Id

. at

1 1 8 8

. Becau s e t h e o ffi cer’ s em p l o y m en t co m

p el l ed h is pres en ce at t h e scen e i n t h e

fi rs t i ns t an ce, h e was no t act i n g as a v o lu n t eer fo r p u r p o s es o f th e res cu e d o ct ri n e

7wh en h e re m o v e d t h e d ri v er fro m h er v eh i cl e, an d t herefo re “ hi s n eg li g en ce cl ai m

ag ai n s t h er [was ] b arred .” Id

.

W h i l e t he i s s u e was n o t di rect l y ad d res s ed i n Gr i n er v. Geo r g i a Fa r m Bu r ea u

,

s u p ra, t h at cas e i n v ol v ed a p l ai n t i ff wh o was in ju red wh en h e ex ceed ed t h e d u t i es o f

t h e jo b t h at b ro u gh t h i m t o an acci d en t s cen e, an d th i s co u rt h el d t h at t h e res cu e

d o ct ri n e di d n o t ap p l y u n d er t h os e ci rcu m s tan ces

. In t h at cas e, a w reck er d ri v er was

cal l ed t o t h e s cen e o f a co l l i s io n b y t h e s t at e pat ro l to u s e h i s t o w t ru ck t o p u l l o n e o f

t h e v eh i cl es

, i n wh i ch t h e d ri v er was t rap p ed

, o u t o f t h e wreck ag e. 2 66 GaAp p

. at

2 8 9 -2 9 0

. Bu t t h e to w i n g cab l e sn ap ped

, ren d eri n g t h e to w t ru ck “ es s en t i al ly u s el es s .”

Id

. at 2 9 0

. Th e t o w t ru ck d ri v er t h en wen t b ey o nd h i s t owi n g d u ti es by at tem p t i n g to

h el p l o w er t he fro n t o f t h e trap p ed ve h i cl e by s t i ck i ng a k n ife i n a t i re to let t h e ai r

o u t

. Id

. W h en h e di d s o, t h e t i re ex pl o d ed

, i n j u ri n g h i s h an d

. Id

. Th e wreck er d ri v er

cl ai m ed t h at t h e res cu e d o ct ri n e p erm i t t ed h im t o reco v er fo r h i s in ju ry

. Ho wev er, t h i s

co u rt reject ed t h e cl ai m , h o l d i n g t h at

t h e res cu e d o ct ri n e w o ul d ap p l y o nl y i f [t h e wreck er d ri v er] w ere act i n g

s i m p l y as a vo l u n teer, o r b y s t an d er. E vi d en ce s h o w i n g t h at [h e] was n o t

s i m p l y a v o lu n t eer, o r b y s t an d er, i n cl u d es th e fact t h at he was cal l ed t o

t h e s cen e b y t h e Geo rg i a St at e Pat ro l

, i n h i s cap aci t y as a wreck er

o p erat o r, b ecau s e h is n am e cam e u p o n t h e ro tat i o n l i s t

. H i s pres en ce at

t h e s cen e, t h erefo re, was t h e res u l t o f a co n tract u al d u t y

.

82 6 6 GaAp p . at 2 9 2 (2 ).

Th u s

, ev en t h o u g h t h e is s u e of wh et her t h e t o w t ru ck d ri v er’ s ex ceed i n g o f h i s

co n tract ual d u t i es t ran s fo rm ed h i m i n t o a v o l u nt eer w as n o t d irect l y ad d res s ed , t h i s

co u rt s t i l l u s ed a s i m i l a r an al y s i s t o t h at u s ed b y th e Ari zo n a Co u rt o f Ap p eal s in

Rea d

. Th at i s

, i n b o t h cas es t h e cri t i cal q u es t i on was n o t t he p l ai n t i ff’ s co nd u ct at t h e

s cen e, b u t wh et h er h e was t here i n t h e fi rs t p lace b ecau s e o f h i s o n -d u t y o r co n t ract u al

o b l i g at i o ns

. A s reco u n t ed ab o ve, i t i s u n d i s p u t ed t h at J u n i el was p res en t at t h e s cen e

o f t h e m al l s h o o t i n g s o lel y b ecau s e he was o n d u t y as a s ecu ri t y o ffi cer. Acco rd i n g l y

,

h e w as n o t a v o lu nt eer o r b y s t a n d e r w i t h i n t h e m ean i ng o f th e res cu e d o ct ri n e, an d

t h erefo re t h e “ t ri al co urt co rrect l y g ran t ed t he d efen d an ts ’ m o t i on s fo r su m m a ry

ju d g m en t .” Gr i ner , s up ra.

2

. Rema in i n g

en u mer a t i o n s o

f er r o r

.

Be c a u s e o f ou r h o l d i n g ab o v e i n Di v i s i o n 1

, we n eed n o t ad d res s J u n i el ’ s

rem ai n i n g arg u m en t s

.

Ju d g men t a f f ir med . An dr ews , P. J., a nd Ra y, J., co ncu r

.

9