SECOND DI VI SI ON

M I LLER, P. J.

, RI C K M A N and REESE, 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 l s .us /r ule s

M ar ch 9, 2020



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 9 A1 89 9

. MULLINAX et al v

. PILGRIM ’S P RIDE

CORPORATION.

A1 9 A1 90 0 . M U LLINAX et al v . RISING, INC.

A1 9 A1 90 1 . M U LLINAX et al v . HALL.

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

J am es Mu l l i nax

, a t ru ck d ri v er, was k i l l ed aft e r h e was ru n o v er b y a fo rk l i ft

o n a farm wh i l e ch i ck en s were b ei n g cau g h t an d l o ad ed fo r t ran s po rt to a p ro ces s i n g

faci li t y

. Th e d eced en t ’ s w i fe fi l ed s u i t ag ai n s t Pi l g ri m ’ s Pri d e Co rp orat i o n

, t h e

ch i ck en m an u fact u ri ng co m p an y ; Ri s i n g

, In c., t h e co m p an y t h at co nt ract ed wi th

Pi l g ri m ’ s t o cat ch an d l o a d t h e ch i ck en s fo r tran s po rt ; an d Garren Ben t o n Hal l

, t h e

o wn er o f t h e farm on w h i ch t h e acci d en t occu rred

. M u l l i n ax ap peal s fro m t h e t ri al

co u rt ’ s g ran t o f su m

m ary ju dg m en t t o Pi l g ri m ’ s

, Ri s in g

, an d Hal l

. W e d et erm i n e t h at

(1 ) t he t ri al co u rt co rrect l y g ran ted s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o Pi l g ri m ’ s b ecau s e Pi l g ri m ’ swas t h e d eced en t ’ s st at u to ry em p l o y er an d was t h erefo re im m un e fro m t o rt l i ab i l i t y ;

(2 ) t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n gran t in g s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o Ri s i n g b ecau s e a ju ry co u ld

co n cl u d e t h at Ri s i ng w a s ne gli g en t i n leav in g t h e fo rk li ft ru nn i n g

, co ns t i t u ti n g at l eas t

o n e pro xi m at e cau s e o f t he d eced en t ’ s i n ju ri es ; an d (3 ) t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n g ran t i n g

s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o Hal l b ecau s e a fact i s s ue ex i s t s reg ard i n g wh et h er H al l

, as t h e

p rem i s es o wn er, b reach ed h i s d u t y o f care t o t h e d eced en t

. T h ere f o r e, i n Cas e No

.

A1 9 A1 89 9

, we affi rm th e g ran t o f s um m ary j u d gm en t t o Pi l g ri m ’ s

, b u t i n Cas e No s

.

A1 9 A1 90 0 an d A 1 9A1 9 0 1

, we rev ers e t h e g ran t o f s um m ary ju d g m en t t o Ri s i n g an d

Hal l , res p ect i v el y

.

“ Su m m ary ju d g m en t i s pro p er wh en th ere is n o g en u i ne i s s ue o f m at eri al fact

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

rev i ew a g ran t o r den i al o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t d e n o vo an d co ns t ru e t he ev i d en ce in

t h e l i g h t m o st fav o r a b l e t o t he n o n m o van t .” (Ci t at io n o m i t t ed

. ) S a n d er so n Fa r ms

,

In c. v. At ki n s , 3 1 0 Ga. Ap p . 4 2 3 (7 1 3 SE2 d 4 8 3 ) (2 0 1 1 ).

As p art o f i t s op erat i o n t o g ro w an d p ro ces s c h i ck en s fo r s al e, Pi l g ri m ’ s

co n tract s wi t h v ari ou s en ti t i es an d p ers o n s t o p erfo rm s o m e o f t h e n eces s ary wo rk

.

At t h e t i m e o f t h e acci d en t

, Pi l g ri m ’ s co n t ract ed wi t h Garren Ben t o n H al l t o rai s e

Pi l g ri m ’ s b i rd s o n h i s farm

. P i l g ri m ’ s al s o co n t ract ed w i t h Ri s i n g

, t o cat ch t h e

2ch i ck en s at d es i g n at ed farm s an d l oad t h em i n t o cag es

. Fi n al l y

, Pi l gri m ’ s co n t ract ed

wi t h M o u n t ai n M i lk Hau l in g, In c. t o t r a n s p ort t h e gro wn b i rd s fro m farm s t o a

d es i g n at ed l o cat i o n

.

Th e d eced en t w as a tru ck d ri v er wh o wo rk ed fo r Mo u n t ai n M i l k

. On an earl y

m o rn i n g i n Sep t em

b er 2 0 1 5

, w h i l e i t was st i l l d ark

, t h e d eced en t was at H al l ’ s farm

d u ri n g a ch i ck en cat ch

. O n e o f Ri s i ng ’ s fo rk li ft o p erat o rs

, Al ejan dro Cam ach o

, was

al s o w o rk i n g o n t h e farm d u ri n g t he ch i ck en cat ch

. Cam ach o st art ed a fo rk l i ft an d

t h en wen t t o u s e t he b at h ro om

, l eav i n g t h e k ey in t h e i g n i t i o n. A M o u n tai n M i lk

em pl o y ee, Th o m as Sewel l

, wh o h a d b een s tan d i n g an d tal k i n g wi t h t he d eced en t

,

o b s erv ed t h e p ark ed fo rk l i ft an d d eci d ed t o u s e i t t o rem o v e cag es fro m t h e ch i ck en

h o u s e an d l o ad th em o n to t h e d eced en t ’ s t ru ck

. In i t i al l y

, wh i l e Sewel l was l o ad i n g

t h e t ru c k

, h e was ab l e t o s ee t h e d eced en t s tan d i n g b es i d e th e t ru ck

. E v en t u al l y

,

h o we v er, wh i le h e rev ers ed t h e fo rk l i ft fro m t h e ch i ck en h o us e, he ran o v er t h e

d eced en t

. Sewel l was n o t au t h o ri zed t o u s e t h e fo rk l i ft an d h ad b een d i s ci p l i n ed p ri o r

t o t he i n ci d en t fo r o p erat i ng t h e fo rk l i ft wi t h ou t au t h o ri zat io n

.

A W o rk ers ’ Co m

p en s at i o n cl ai m wa s fi l ed ag ai n s t t h e d eced en t ’ s em p l o y er,

M o u nt ai n M i l k

, o n t h e deced en t ’ s b eh al f. M u l li n ax

, i n di v i d u al l y an d i n h er cap aci ti es

as t h e d eced en t ’ s s u rv i v i n g s p o u s e an d t he ad m i n i s t rat ri x o f th e deced en t’ s es t at e,

3a l s o fi l ed t h es e t o rt act i o n s ag ai n s t Pi l gri m ’ s

, Ri s in g, an d Hal l

, as s ert i n g n u m e r o u s

al l eg at i o n s o f n eg l i g en ce. Al l t h ree d efen d an t s fi l ed m ot i on s fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

.

Pi l g ri m ’ s co n t en d ed t h at i t was t h e d eced en t’ s s t at u to ry em p l o y er, an d t h u s an y

cl ai m s ag ai n s t P i l g ri m ’ s Pri d e were b arred b y t h e ex cl u s iv it y p ro v i s i o n o f t h e

W o rk ers ’ Co m

p en s at i o n Act

. Ri s i n g arg u ed th at it d i d n o t o we t h e d eced en t an y l eg al

d u t y o f care, i n cl u d i n g an y d u t y t o p rev en t u n au t h o ri zed an d u nt rai n ed p ers o n s fro m

o p erat i n g a fo rk l i ft

. Hal l cl ai m ed t h at

, al t h ou g h he o wn e d t h e f a rm

, h e was o n l y

res p o n s i b l e fo r g ro wi n g t h e ch i ck en s

, h e rel i n qu i s h ed co n t ro l o f t h e area d uri n g t h e

cat ch

, an d h e h ad n o r e s p o n s i b i l i t i es o r du t i es reg ard i n g t h e ch ick en cat ch p ro ces s

.

Aft er a h eari n g

, t h e t ri al co u rt g ran t ed s u m m ary ju d g m en t i n fav o r o f Pi l g ri m ’ s

,

Ri s i n g

, an d Hal l

. Fi rs t

, th e t ri al co u rt d et erm in ed t h at Pi l g ri m ’ s was t h e d eced en t ’ s

s t at u to ry em

pl oy er an d t h at M u l l i n ax ’ s cl ai m s ag ai n s t t h e co m p an y w e re t h erefo re

b arred b y t h e ex cl us i v i t y p ro v i s i o n o f t h e W o rk ers ’ Co m p en s at i o n Act (OCGA § § 3 4

-

9 -8

, 34 -9 -1 1 (a)). Seco n d

, wi t h reg ard t o Ri s i n g

, t h e t ri al co u rt d et erm i n e d t h a t (1 )

t h ere was n o g en ui ne fact u al d i s p u t e as t o Ri s i n g ’ s i n s p ect i o n of t h e fo rk l i ft o r i t s

fai l u re t o rem o v e u n safe eq u ip m en t fro m s erv ice; (2 ) Ri si n g h ad n o d u t y t o co n tro l

Sewel l

, t h e M o u n tai n M i l k em p l o y ee wh o o p erat ed t h e fo rk li ft ; an d (3 ) t h ere was n o

g en ui n e fact i s s u e reg ard i ng a cau sal co n n ect i o n b et ween Cam ach o ’ s ab an d o n m en t

4o f t h e fo rk l i ft an d t h e d eced en t ’ s d am ag es

. Fi nal l y

, as ag ai n s t Hal l, t h e t ri al c o u rt

ru l ed t h at Hal l was j u s t i fi ed i n as s u m i n g t hat t h e d eced en t wo u l d real i ze t h e ri s k

i n v o l v ed i n t rav ers i n g th e u n li t p rem i s es an d t h at t h e d eced en t h ad v o l u n t ari l y

as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f i nju ry

. M u l l i n a x a p p eal ed t h e tri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f s u m m ary

ju d g m en t t o al l t h ree d efen dan t s

.

Ca s e No . A1 9

A1 8 9 9

1

. In t he fi rs t cas e, M u l l i n ax arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt err e d i n g ran t i n g

s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o Pi l g ri m ’ s on t h e b as i s th at Pi l g ri m ’ s was th e d eced en t ’ s

s t at u to ry em

p l o y er u n d er OCGA § 3 4-9 -8 an d t hat i t was t h erefo re i m m u n e fro m to rt

l i ab i l i t y

. Mu l l i n ax co n t en d s t h at (1 ) t here i s a fact i s s u e reg ard i n g wh et h er Pi l g ri m ’ s

ex erci s ed co nt ro l o v er t h e far m ; a n d (2 ) t h e s t at u t e d o es n o t ap p l y t o Pi l g ri m ’ s

b ecau s e i t i s t h e o w n er o f t h e en t erp ri s e. Reg ard l es s o f w h et h er P i l g r i m ’ s Pri d e

ex erci s ed co n t ro l o v er t h e farm

, h o w ev er, w e d e t e r m i n e t h at Pi l g ri m ’ s was t h e

d eced en t ’ s s t at u t o ry em

p l o y er b ecau s e (1 ) Pi l g ri m ’ s was a p ri n ci p al co n tract o r; an d

( 2 ) t he i n ju ry occu rred o n o r i n t h e p rem i s es wh ere Pi l g ri m ’ s h ad u n d ert ak e n t o

ex ecu t e w o rk

. Th erefo re, M u l l i n a x ’ s cl ai m s ag ai n st Pi lg ri m ’ s are b arred b y t h e

ex cl u s i v i t y p ro v i s i o n o f t he W o rk ers ’ Co m p en sat i o n A ct

, an d t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t

o f s u m m ary ju dg m en t was pro per.

5a

. Excl u s i ve r emed y a n d s t a tu t o r y emp l oyer

p r o vi s i o n s

.

Th e ex cl u s i v e rem ed y p ro v i s i o n o f t h e W ork ers ’ Co m p en s at i o n Act read s as

fo l l o w s :

Th e ri g h t s an d t h e rem ed ies gran t ed to an em p l oy ee b y t hi s ch ap t er sh al l

ex cl ud e an d b e i n p l ace o f al l o t h e r ri g h t s an d rem ed ies of s u ch

em p l o y ee, hi s o r h er p ers o n al rep res en t at i v e, p aren t s

, d e p en d en t s

, o r

n ex t o f k i n

, an d al l o t h er ci v i l l iab i l i t ies wh at s o ev er at co m m o n l aw o r

o t h erwi se, o n acco un t o f s u ch i n ju ry , l o s s o f s erv i ce, o r d eat h [.]

OCGA § 3 4-9 -1 1 (a). “ Th erefo re, wh ere t h e Act ap p l i es

, i t p ro v i d es t h e em p l o y ee’ s

ex cl u s i v e rem ed y ag ai n st hi s em p l o y er an d p recl u d es reco v ery o n a t o rt cl ai m b y an

i n ju red em p l o y ee a ga inst hi s em

p l o y er.” (Ci t at i o n s an d p u n ct u at io n o m i t t ed

. ) Tea s l ey

v. Fr eema n

, 3 0 5 Ga. A p p. 1

, 2 (1 ) (6 9 9 SE2 d 3 9) (2 0 1 0 ). Rel at ed l y

, “ [t ] h e st at u t o ry

em pl o y er p ro v is i on o f t h e [ Wo rk ers ’ Co m p en s at io n] Act

, OCGA § 3 4 -9 -8

, m ak es

p ri n ci p al o r i n t erm ed i at e co n t ra c t o rs s eco n d ari l y l i ab l e fo r wo rk ers ’ co m p en s at i o n

b en efi t s fo r i n

ju red em p l o y ees of a su b co n tract o r.” (Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed .) Ca r r v. Fed Ex

Gr o un d Pa cka g e S

ys t e m

, In c.

, 3 17 Ga. Ap p

. 7 3 3

, 7 3 4 (2 ) (7 3 3 SE2 d 1 ) (2 0 1 2 ).

“ Th u s

, s o l on g as [Pi l g ri m ’ s ] was [t h e deced en t’ s ] s t at u to ry em p l o y er, i t wo u l d en

jo y

i m m u ni t y fro m a t o rt cl ai m .” (Ci t at i o n om i t t ed

. ) M a g ui r e v. Do mi n i on Dev. Co rp

. ,

2 4 1 Ga. A p p

. 7 15

, 7 1 7 (5 2 7 SE2 d 5 7 5 ) (1 9 9 9 ). Al t h o u g h t h i s to rt i m m u n i t y i s an

6affi rm at i v e d efen s e, Za l d i va r v. Pr i cket t

, 2 9 7 Ga. 5 8 9

, 60 4 (2 ) (7 7 4 SE2 d 6 8 8 )

(2 0 1 5), “ [w] h en t h e fact s co n cern i n g an affi rm at i v e d efen se are u n co n t rad i ct ed

, t h e

m at t er m ay b e d i s p os ed o f b y s u m m ary ju d g m en t [.] ” (C i t a t i o n o m i t t ed .) Keen e v.

Her st a m , 2 2 5 Ga. Ap p . 1 1 5, 1 1 6 (1 ) (4 8 3 SE2 d 3 3 5 ) (1 9 9 7 ).

b . Pi l g r i m’s Pr i d

e wa s t h e d

eced en t ’s s t a t u t o r

y emp l o yer

Fi rs t

, Pi lg ri m ’ s was a p ri n ci p al co n tract o r u n d er OCGA § 3 4

- 9

- 8 ( a )

. “ [A]

‘ pri n ci p al co n t ract o r’ en gag es s u b co nt ract o rs t o as s i s t i n t h e p erfo rm an ce of t h e wo rk

o r t h e co m

p let io n o f t h e p ro

ject wh i ch t h e ‘p ri n ci pal co n t ract o r’ h as u n d ert ak en to

p erfo rm fo r an o th er.” (Ci t at i on an d em p h as i s o m i t ted .) Y

o h o v. Ri ng i er o

f Amer i ca

,

In c.

, 2 6 3 Ga. 33 8

, 3 4 2 (4 3 4 SE2 d 5 7 ) (1 99 3 ). 1 T h erefo re, O CGA § 3 4 -9 -8 (a) ex t en d s

“ t o t h o s e wh o co n t ract t o perfo rm cert ai n wo rk

, s u ch a s t h e f ur n i s h i n g o

f g o o d s a n d

s er vi ces

, f

o r a n o t her

, an d t h en s u b l et i n wh ol e o r part s u ch wo rk

. ” (Ci tat i o n o m i t t ed ;

em ph as i s s u p p l i ed

. ) Id

. at 3 3 9

.

W i t h o u t d i s p u t e, t h e ev i d en ce d em o n s t rat es t hat Pi l g ri m ’ s co n t r a ct u al l y

ret ai n ed M ou n t ai n Mi l k t o h au l ch i ck en s i n o rd er t o fu l fi l l i ts o w n co n t ract s wi t h i t s

cu s t o m ers

. In o t h er wo rd s

, “ [Pi l g ri m ’ s ] en te r e d in t o it s co n t ract w i t h [M o u nt ai n M il k ]

1 W e n o t e th at a p ri n ci p al ’ s s ub co n t ract o r can al s o b e an i n d e p e n d en t

co n tract or. La n dr u m v. Co b b Co u n t y Co ncr et e Pr od

u ct s, In c.

, 1 9 1 G a. Ap p

. 8 0 5 (1 )

(3 8 3 SE2 d 1 4 4 ) (1 9 8 9 ).

7i n s p eci fi c fu rt h eran ce o f t h e c o n t r a c t ob l i g at io n s i t an t i ci pat ed o w i ng t o i t s

cu s t o m ers

, an d [M o u n tai n M i l k ] as s um ed res po n si b i l i t i es to [Pi l gri m ’ s ] s peci fi cal l y

t i ed t o t h o s e an t i ci p at ed ob l i g at i o n s .” Ca r r

, s u p ra, 3 1 7 Ga. Ap p

. at at 7 3 9 (3 ) (b ). See

Pa t t er s o n v. Br i s t ol

Ti mb er Co

. , 2 8 6 Ga. Ap p

. 4 2 3

, 4 3 0 (3 ) (6 4 9 SE2 d 7 9 5 ) (2 0 0 7 )

(ap p el l ee was a p ri n ci p al co n t ract o r b ecau s e it h ad en tered i n t o a co n tract t o s u p p l y

wo o d ch i p s t o a pack a gi ng co m p an y

, an d

, i n o rd er t o effect u at e t h at co n t ract

, i t

ex ecu t ed a co n t ract wi t h t h e p l ai n t i ff’ s em p l o y er to lo ad an d tran s p o rt t h e wo o d ch i p s

t o t h e p ack ag i n g c o m

p a n y)

. T h e fact t h at Pi l g ri m ’ s o wn ed t he ch i ck en s d o es n ot

p recl u d e i t fro m b ei n g a p ri n ci pal co n t ract or. See P at t er s o n

, s u p ra, 2 86 G a. Ap p

. at

4 3 0 ( 3 ) (reject in g t h e arg u m en t t h at t h e ap p el l ee co u l d n o t b e co n s i d ere d t h e

p l ai n t i ff’ s s tat u t o ry em

p l o y er b ecau s e t he p l ai n t i ff was d el iv eri n g t he ap p el l ee’ s

p ro d uct wh en th e i n

j u ry occu rred ). Th u s

, Pi lg ri m ’ s w as a pri n ci p al co n tract o r fo r

p u rp os es o f OCGA § 3 4 -9 -8 (a).

Seco n d

, t h e reco rd pl ai n l y s h o ws t h at t h e i n j u ri es t o t h e d eced en t o ccu rred o n

Hal l ’ s farm

, o n wh i ch Pi l g ri m ’ s h ad un d ert ak e n t o ex ecu t e wo rk t h ro u g h i t s

s u b co n t ract o r, M o u n t ai n M i l k. 2 Th e s t at u t ory em p lo ye r p ro v is i on ap pl i es “ i n cas es

2 M u l li n ax em

ph as i zes t h at t h e farm d i d n o t bel o n g to Pi l g ri m ’ s an d t h at Hal l

o wn ed t h e farm

. Bu t t h e farm n eed n o t h av e b el o n g ed to Pi l g ri m ’ s i n o rd er fo r

Pi l g ri m ’ s t o b e t h e s t at ut ory em p l o y er. Th e i s s u e h ere i s wh et h er Pi l g ri m ’ s u n d ert o o k

8wh ere t he i n ju ry o ccu rred o n

, i n

, o r ab o u t t h e p r e m i s es o n wh i ch t h e p r i n ci p al

co n tr a ct o r h a s u n d

er t a ken t o execu t e wo r

k o r wh i ch are o t h erwi s e u n der h i s co n tro l

o r m an ag em en t .” (Em

ph as i s s u p p l i e d

. ) OCGA § 3 4 -9 -8 (d ). Pi l g ri m ’ s “ Li v e Hau l

Ag reem en t ” wi t h M o u n t ai n M i l k p ro v i d ed t h at Mo u n t ai n M il k wo ul d “ [f] u rn i s h al l

l ab o r, tract o rs an d s up p l i es as n eces sary

, t o h au l b ird s to Pi l g ri m ’ s Pri d e’ s d es i g n at ed

l o cat io n .” As p a r t o f th i s ag reem en t

, Pi l g ri m ’ s ex pect ed M o u n t ai n M i l k ’ s t ru ck

d ri v ers t o b e “ at t h e farm t o h au l b i rd s ,” an d t h e d eced en t was at Hal l ’ s farm t o h au l

b i rd s o n t h e d at e o f t h e acci d en t

.

Si m i l arl y

, fo r i n s t an ce, i n Amer i ca n M u t

. Li a bi l i t

y In s

. Co

. v. F

u l ler

, 1 2 3 Ga.

A p p

. 5 8 5

, 5 8 8 (1 8 1 SE2 d 8 7 6 ) (1 9 7 1 ), t h e p ri nci p al co n t ract o r had en t ered i n t o a

h au li n g co n t ract wi t h t h e p l ai n t i f f’ s em p l o y er t o t ran s p o rt p o u l t ry fro m Geo rg i a to

New J ers ey

. Th e pl ai n t i ff was i n ju red o n a h ig h way wh i l e at tem pt in g t o s h i ft a l o ad

t o ex ecu t e wo rk o n t h e farm

, n o t wh et h er Pi l g ri m ’ s o wn ed i t. OCGA § 3 4 -9 -8 (d ). See

W i l l ia ms v. At l a nt a Ga s Li

g ht Co

. , 1 6 8 Ga. A pp

. 2 0 8

, 2 0 9 (1 ) (3 0 8 SE2 d 5 53 ) (1 9 8 3 ).

Al s o

, M u l l i n ax ’ s rel i an ce o n G r a ml i n g v. S u n s hi n e Bi scu i t

s

, In c.

, 1 6 2 Ga. A p p

. 8 6 3

(2 9 2 SE2 d 5 3 9) (1 9 8 2 ), do es n o t ai d h er arg u m en t

. In t h at cas e, t he pl ai n t i ff was t h e

em pl o y ee o f a carri er t h at was u n d er c o n t r a c t wi t h a s h i pp er, an d th e pl ai n t i ff was

i n ju red at a cu s t om er’ s p rem i s e s w h i l e d el i v eri n g th e s h i p p er’ s g oo d s

. Id

. W e

d et erm i n ed t h at , fo r p urp o s es o f OCGA § 3 4 -9 -8 (d ), t h e wo rd “ p rem i s es ” d o es n ot

i n cl u d e t h e p rem i ses o f a s h i p p er’ s cu s t o m er t o wh i ch g o o d s are d el i v ered . Id . Th i s

cas e d o es n o t in v o l v e t h e p rem i s es o f a sh i p per’ s cu st o m er. Gr aml i n g i s t h e r e fo re

fact ual ly d is t i n g u i s h ab l e fro m t h e cas e b efo re u s a n d cl earl y do es n o t d i ct at e t h e

res u l t h ere.

9o n t he t ran s po rt t ru ck

. Id

. at 5 8 7

. W e ex p l ai n ed t h at “ [w] h en [t h e p lai n t i f f ] w a s

em pl o y ed

, t h e [p ri n ci p al co n t ract o r] h ad a co n tract wh ich co n t em p l at ed t h e h au l i n g

o f

. . . frei g ht o n t h e h i g h way s.

. . . [T] o t h e ex t en t neces s ary fo r t h e p erfo rm an ce, t h e

h i g h way s were ‘ p rem i s es ’ o n wh i ch t h e pri n ci p al co n t ract o r h as u nd ert ak en t o

ex ecu t e wo rk .” Id . at 5 8 7 -5 8 8

.

Fu l l er i s ak i n t o t h e p res en t cas e. H ere, wh en t h e d eced en t w a s e m p l o y ed

,

Pi l g ri m ’ s h ad a co n t ract wi t h Mo u n t ai n Mi l k fo r th e h au l i n g o f i ts bi rd s fro m s p eci fi c

farm s t o a “ Pi l g ri m ’ s d es i gn at ed l o cat i o n ,” an d t o t h e ex t en t n eces s ary fo r Mo u n t ai n

M i l k’ s perfo rm an ce o f t h o s e du t i es

, Hal l ’ s farm was p rem i s es o n wh i ch Pi l g ri m ’ s h ad

u n d ert ak en t o ex ecu t e wo rk

. Co m p are Beer s Co ns t r

. Co

. v. Do

yl e

, 2 3 0 Ga. A p p

. 5 9 3,

5 9 4 (4 9 6 SE2 d 9 2 1 ) (1 99 8 ) (wh ere p ri n ci p al co nt ract o r s p eci fi cal l y co n t ract ed wi th

p l ai n t i ff’ s em

p l o y er fo r wo rk t o b e d on e at a ch i l d ren ’ s h o s p i tal

, b u t t h e p l ai n t i ff was

i n ju red at th e s u b co n t ract o r’ s wo rk s h o p

, t h e s u b co n t ract o r’ s wo rk s h o p was n o t

“ p rem i s es ” o n wh i ch t h e p ri n ci p al co n tract o r u n d ert oo k t o ex ecu t e wo rk ) (p h y s i cal

pr e c e de nt onl y ). Th u s

, Hal l ’ s farm co n s t i t ut ed p rem i s es o n wh i ch Pi lg r im ’ s unde r took

t o ex ecu te wo rk

.

Becau s e Pi l g ri m ’ s was a p ri n ci p al co n t ract o r u n d er OCGA § 3 4 -9 -8 (a) wh en

t h e d eced en t’ s i nju ri es occu rre d

, an d b ecau s e Hal l’ s farm co n s ti t ut ed prem i s es o n

10wh i ch Pi l g ri m ’ s u n d ert o o k to ex ecu t e wo rk

, Pi l g ri m ’ s i s i m m u n e fro m t o rt l i ab i l i t y

.

Th erefo re, we affi rm t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o Pi l g ri m ’ s

.

Ca s e No . A1 9

A1 9 0 0

2

. In t he seco n d cas e, Mu l l i n ax ap p eal s fro m th e t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f s u m m ary

j u d g m en t t o Ri s i n g

. M u l l i n ax arg u es t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred b ecau se Ri si n g o wed

t h e d eced en t a d u t y t o act reas o nab l y

, an d t h at t h ere are fact i ss u es reg ard i n g wh et h er

Ri s i n g b reach ed t h at d u ty an d p ro x i m at el y cau s ed t h e d eced en t ’ s in ju ri es an d d eat h.

W e d et erm i n e th at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n g ran t i n g s u m m ary ju dg m en t t o Ri s i n g

b ecau s e t h ere are fact i ss u es reg ard i n g wh et h er Ri s i n g b reach ed i t s d ut y o f care t o t h e

d eced en t an d wh et h er s u ch b reach was at l eas t o ne p ro x im at e cau s e of t h e d eced en t ’ s

i n ju ri es

.

a . Fa ct

i s s u es exi s t

r eg a r d i n g

b r ea ch o f d u t y a n d p r o xi m a t e ca u se.

“ W h ere t wo or m o re i n d ep en d en t co n t ract o rs

, o r a g en eral co nt ract o r an d o n e

o r m ore s u b co n t ract o rs , are en g ag ed i n wo rk o n t h e s am e p rem i s es

, i t i s th e d u t y o f

each co n tract o r, i n p ro s ecu t i n g h i s wo rk , t o u s e o rd in ary an d reas on ab le care n o t to

cau s e i n j u ri es to t h e s erv an t s of an o t her co n t ract or.” Do ke v. Do ver El eva t o r Co

. , 1 5 2

11G a

. Ap p

. 4 3 4

, 4 3 6 (2 6 3 SE2 d 2 0 9 ) (1 9 7 9 ); Ra g sd a le Hea t i n g & Ai r Co n d i t i o n i n g

,

In c. v. Ter r el l , 2 4 5 Ga. Ap p . 8 6 6 , 8 6 7 (5 3 9 SE2 d 1 9 9 ) (2 0 0 0 ) (s am e). 3

Ord i n ary care i s t h a t deg ree o f care w hi ch i s ex erci s ed b y o rd i n ari l y

p ru d en t p ers o ns u n d er t h e s am e o r s i m i l ar ci rcu m s t an ces

. Ex act l y wh at

co n s t i t ut es ‘ o rd i n a r y care’ v ari es w i th t h e ci rcu m st an ces an d th e

m ag n it u d e o f t he d an g er t o b e g u ard ed ag ai n s t

. Si n ce i t i s i m p os s i b l e t o

p res cri b e defi n i t e ru l es i n ad v an ce fo r ev ery co m b i n at i o n o f

ci rcu m s t an ces wh i ch m ay ari s e, t h e d et ai l s o f t h e s t an d ard m u s t b e fi l led

i n each p art icu l ar cas e. Bu t

, to b e n eg l i g en t

, t h e co n d u ct m u s t be

3 In Ri s i n g ’ s v i ew, t h e D o ke deci s i o n on l y creat es a d u t y o f reas o n ab l e care

wh ere t h e act i o n s o f t h e s u b co n t ract o r d efe n d a n t creat e t h e h azard t h at cau s es t h e

i n ju ry

, an d Ri si n g h ad n o d u t y t o t h e d eced en t u n d er Do ke b ecau s e t h e h azard o u s

co n di t i o n t h at cau s ed t h e d eced en t ’ s d eat h was Sewel l ’ s u n a u t h o ri zed u s e o f t h e

fo rk l ift

. Bu t th e D o ke deci s i o n d o e s n o t s u p p o rt t h i s arg u m en t

. In Do ke

, t he p l ai n t i ff

wo rk ed o n a co n s tru ct i o n p ro ject s it e (as an em

p l o y ee of t h e g en eral co n t ract o r), an d

t h e d efen d an t w as a s u b co n t ract o r res p o n s i b l e fo r i ns t al l i n g el ev at o rs at t h e s i t e.

Do ke , s u p ra, 1 5 2 Ga. Ap p . at 4 3 4

. Th e p l ai n t i ff fel l i n t o a v en t h ol e i n t h e t o p o f an

el ev at o r s h a f

t

, wh i ch h ad b een co v ered b y a n ai led s h eet o f p l y wo o d t h at b ecam e

u n fas t en ed

. Id

. at 4 3 5

. T h e d efen d an t h ad n o t co n s t ru ct ed t h e s h aft or t h e v en t h o l e;

i t h ad n o t n ai l ed t h e p l y

wo o d s h eet o v er t h e h ol e; an d t h ere w as n o ev i d en ce t h at t h e

d efe n d a n t h a d u n fas t en ed t h e p l y wo o d o r k n ew t h at i t h ad b een un fas t en ed

. Id

. Nev ert h el es s

, al t h o ug h i t p ro b ab l y co u l d h av e b een s ai d t h at t h e p l ai n t i ff’ s em p l o y er

h ad cr e a t e d t h e h azard

, we m ad e cl ear t h at th e d efen d an t “ owed it s fel l o w wo rk er,

ap p el l an t

, t h e d u t y o f u si n g reas o n ab l e care t o as s u re h i s s afet y wh i l e h e wo rk ed n ear

t h e el ev at o r s h aft ,” an d i t was fo r t h e ju ry t o d et erm i n e wh e t h er t h e d efen d an t h ad

b een n e g l i g e n t i n an y m an n er. Id at 4 3 6

. Th u s

, ev en t ho u gh a M o u n t ai n M i lk

em pl o y ee ran o ver t h e d eced en t i n t h i s cas e, t h e Do ke d eci s i o n d o e s n ot p recl u d e

Ri s i n g fro m h av i n g a d u t y t o t h e d eced e n t

— a “ fel l o w wo rk er” wh o was wo rk i n g

n ear t he fo rk l i ft

.

12u n reas o n ab l e i n li g h t o f th e reco gn i zab l e ri s k o f h arm

. W h et h er a p art y

h as fai l ed t o ex erci s e o rd i n ary care m ay b e d eci d ed b y t h e co u rt o n l y i n

cas es i n wh i ch u n d i s p u t a b l e

, p l ai n an d p al p ab l e fact s ex i s t o n wh ich

reas o n ab l e m i n d s co u l d n o t d i ffer as t o t h e co n cl u s i o n t o b e reach ed

.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p u nct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) Ja cks on v. Po s t P ro p er ti es

, In c.

, 2 36 Ga. Ap p.

7 0 1

, 7 0 2 (5 1 3 SE2 d 2 5 9) (1 9 9 9 ). Th u s

, al t h o ug h Ri s i n g h ad no d u t y t o co nt ro l Sewel l

(t he M o u n t ai n M i l k em

p l o y ee wh o s t art ed o p erat i n g th e ab an d o ned fo rk l i ft an d ran

o v er t h e d eced en t), 4 t h e t ri al co u rt co rrect l y co n cl u d ed t h at Ri s i n g s ti l l h ad a d u t y to

ex erci s e o rd in ary

care wi t h reg ard t o t h e fo rk l i ft

.

In d et erm in i n g w h at i s p ro x i m at e cau s e t h e t ru e ru l e i s

, t h at t he i n ju ry

m u s t b e t h e n at u ral an d p ro b ab l e co n s eq uen ce o f t h e n eg l ig en ce, s u ch

a co n s eq u en ce as u n d er t he s urro u n di n g ci rcu m s t an ces of t h e cas e m i g h t

an d o u g h t t o h a v e b een fo res een b y t h e wro n g -d oer as l i k el y t o fl o w

fro m h i s act

. Th e i n

ju ry m u s t b e t he d i rect res ul t o f t h e m i s c o n d uct

ch arg ed ; b u t i t wi l l n ot b e co n s i d ered to o rem o te if, acco rd i n g t o th e

u s u al ex p eri en ce o f m an ki n d

, t h e res u l t o u g ht t o h av e be e n a pp reh en d ed

.

(Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed .) Bea s l ey v. A Bet ter Ga s Co

. , 2 69 Ga. Ap p

. 42 6

, 4 28 (1 ) (6 0 4 SE2 d

2 0 2 ) (2 00 4 ). “ Cl earl y th ere can b e m o re th an o n e p ro x i m at e c a u s e of an acci d en t ,”

4 “ Un d er Geo rg i a l aw, as a g en eral ru l e, t h ere i s n o du t y t o co n t ro l t h e co n d u ct

o f t h i rd p ers o n s to p rev en t t h em fro m cau s i n g p h y s i cal h arm t o o t hers .” (Ci t at i o n an d

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

ecu reAl er t

, In c. v. Bo gg

s

, 3 4 5 Ga. Ap p

. 8 1 2

, 8 1 6 (8 1 5 SE2 d

1 5 6 ) (2 0 1 8 ).

13an d “ i f t h e ori g i n al n eg l i g en t act o r reas on ab ly co ul d hav e an t ici p at ed o r fo res een t h e

i n t erv en i n g act an d i ts co n s eq u en ces

, t h en t h e i n t erv en i n g act o f neg l i gen ce wi l l n ot

rel i ev e t he o ri g i n al act o r fro m l i ab i li t y fo r t h e co n s eq u en ces res u lt i ng fro m t h e

i n t erv en i n g act .” (Ci t at i o n o m i tt ed .) S mi t h v. Co mmer ci a l Tr a n s p., In c.

, 2 2 0 Ga. Ap p.

8 6 6

, 8 6 7 ( 1) (4 7 0 SE2 d 4 4 6) (1 9 9 6 ). In co n d u ct i n g t h e fo res eeab i li t y an al y s i s

, t h e

o p erat i v e i n q u i ry is “ wh et h er, as a g en eral m at t er, t h e o ri g in al n eg l i g en t act o r s h o u ld

h av e an t i ci p at ed t h at t h i s g en eral ty p e o f h arm m i gh t re s u l t .” (Ci t at i o n o m i t t ed .)

Geo rg i a Dep t

. o

f Tr an s p

. v. Owen s

, 3 3 0 Ga. Ap p. 1 2 3

, 1 31 (2 ) (7 6 6 SE2 d 5 6 9 )

(2 0 1 4). Li k e t h e fai l u re t o ex erci s e o rd i nary care, “ [q ] u es t i o n s o f

. . . p ro x i m at e cau s e

an d wh o s e n eg l ig en ce co n s t i t u t ed th e p ro x im at e cau s e o f t h e p l ai n t iff’ s i n ju ri es are,

ex cep t i n p l ai n, p al p ab l e an d i n di s pu t ab le cas es

, s o l el y f o r t h e ju ry .” (Ci t at i o n

o m it t ed .) Id . at 1 3 2 (2 ).

Pret erm it t i n g wh et h er t h ere are fact q u es t i on s reg ard i n g t he co n d it i o n o f t h e

fo rk l ift o r wh et h er t h e fo rk l i ft was p ro p erl y i ns p ect ed , a ju ry

co u l d s t i l l fi n d Ri s i n g

l i ab l e. Sp eci fi cal l y

, t he ju ry co ul d co n cl ud e t h at Ri s i n g

, t h ro u g h i t s fo rk l i ft op erat o r,

fai l ed t o ex erci s e o rd i n ary care b y l eav i n g th e fo rk l i ft ru n n i ng an d u n at t en d ed

,

p art i cu l arl y in Se w e l l ’s p r es en ce, co n s t i t u t in g at l eas t o n e p ro xi m at e cau s e o f t h e

d eced en t ’ s i n

ju ri es

. Fi rs t

, Mu l l i n a x p r es en t ed an affi d av i t o f an ex p ert i n h eav y

14m ach i n ery

, i n c l u d i n g fo rk l i ft s afet y

, an d th i s ex p ert av erred t h at s tan d ard i n d u s t ry

cu s t o m an d p ract ice di ct at e t h at fo rk l i ft o perat ors “ s to p t h e en g i ne an d rem o v e t h e

k ey t o t he fo rk l ift b efo re ex it i ng t h e v eh i cl e an d l eav i n g t h e o p erat o r’ s po s i t i o n.”

Seco n d

, Ri s i n g was fu l ly aware t h at Sewel l h ad a hi s t o ry o f d ri v i n g t h e fo rk l i ft

wi t h o u t au t h o ri t y . Ap p ro x i m at el y a y ear b efo re t h i s i n ci d en t

, Ri s i n g ’ s o wn er d ro v e

t o a farm

, s aw Sewel l d ri v i n g o n e o f t h e fo rk l i ft s

, an d t o l d h i m t o “ st ay o ff t h at

l o ad er.” Sh e al s o rep o rt ed Sewel l t o M o u n t ai n M i lk

. Bu t in h er d ep o s i t i o n

, s h e al s o

ex p l a i n e d t h at Sewel l co n t i n u ed t o u s e t h e fo rk l i ft s an d t h at h i s u s e o f t h e fo rk l i ft s

“ wen t [o n ] fo r a wh i l e.” Sewel l

, t o o

, t es t i fi ed th at h e h ad d o n e t hi s t h ree o r fo u r t i m es

i n t h e s am e y ear t h at t h e acci d en t o ccu rred

. In fact

, Ri s i n g ’ s o wn er d es cri b ed Sewel l

as a “ h ard h ead ” an d ex pres s ed t h at sh e w as n o t s u rp ri s ed t h at h e h ad ru n o v er

s o m eo n e. Sh e ad m i t t ed

, h owev er, t h at s h e h ad n ev e r t o l d Cam ach o t o k eep t h e

i g n i t io n k ey o n h i s p ers o n

, an d ag reed t hat i f Cam ach o h ad rem o v ed th e k ey fro m t h e

i g n i t io n , Sewel l wo u ld n o t h av e b een ab l e t o d ri ve t he fo rk l i ft

. 5

Th u s

, Ri si n g had act u al k n o wl ed g e t h at w h i l e en gag e d i n i t s o wn wo rk o f

o p erat i n g fo rk li ft s d u ri n g ch i ck en cat ch es

, a p art i c u l a r wo rk er r ep ea t ed l y u s ed a

5 Cam ach o t es t i fi ed t h at i t was Pi l g ri m ’ s ru l e to l eav e th e k ey in t he fo rk l i ft

. A

s u p erv i s o r w i t h Ri s i n g

, h o wev er, tes t i fi ed th at h e was n ot aware o f an y s u ch ru l e fro m

Pi l g ri m ’ s

.

15fo rk l ift wi t h ou t au t h o ri t y

, ev en aft er b ei n g w arn ed n o t t o d o s o

. Th e r e c o r d a l s o

m a k es cl ear t h at t h e ch i ck en cat ch es oft en o ccu r i n t h e d ark

, an d Ri si n g was awa r e

t h at t h e tru ck d ri v ers are o n s i t e d u ri n g t h e cat ch es

, i n th e area wh ere t h e fo rk l i ft s are

o p erat ed

. Gi v e n t h es e ci rcu m st an ces

, reas o n ab l e m in d s can d iffer as t o wh et h er

Ri s i n g breach ed i t s d u t y o f o rd i n ary care b y leav i n g t h e fo rk l i ft ru n n i n g. An d wi th

reg ard t o p ro x i m at e cau s e, th e ev i d en ce d i s cu s s ed ab ov e wo u l d al l o w a ju ry t o fi n d

t h at Ri s i n g co u l d h av e an t i ci pat ed bo t h t h at (1 ) Sewel l wo u l d u se o n e of t h e fo rk l i ft s ;

an d (2 ) s om eo n e d ri v i n g t h e fo rk l i ft wi t h o ut au t h o ri t y m ig h t co l li d e w i t h o r ru n o v er

an o th er w o rk er, es peci al ly du ri n g a ch i ck en cat ch t h at o cc u r s i n e arl y m o rn i n g

d ark n es s. See, e.g

., Owen s , s u pra, 3 3 0 Ga. Ap p

. at 13 1 -1 3 2 (2 ) (ex p l ai n i n g t h at t h e

i s su e w a s n o t wh et h er t h e ap p el lee cau s ed t h e p l ai n ti ff’ s m an n er o f dri v i n g b ut

wh et h er t h e ap p el l ee co ul d h av e an t i ci p at ed t h e p l ai n t iff’ s d ri vi ng an d t h e en s u i n g

co l l i s i o n s u ch t hat t h e ap p el l ee’ s al l e g e d n eg l i g en ce m ay co n st i t u t e at l eas t o n e

p ro x im at e cau s e o f t h e p lai n t i ff’ s i n j u ri es ). In v iewi n g t h e ev i d en ce i n th e l i g h t m o s t

fav o ra b l e t o M u l li n ax as th e n o n -m o v an t

, as we m u st

, t h ere are g en u i n e i s s u es o f

16m at eri al fact reg ard i n g wh et h er Ri s i n g b reach ed i t s du t y o f care t o t h e d eced en t an d

was at l eas t o n e p ro x i m at e cau s e o f t h e d eced en t ’ s i n ju ri es

. 6

b . Immu ni t

y u n d er t h e W o r ker s ’ Co m p en s at i o n Act

.

Al t ern at i v el y

, Ri s i n g u r g e s u s t o affi rm t h e g ran t o f s um m ary j u d gm en t o n

an o th e r b as i s

, arg u in g t h at i t i s en t i t l ed t o im m u n i t y un d er t h e W o rk ers ’

Co m p en s at i o n Act

. Ri s i n g p o si t s t h at becau s e M u l li n ax al l eg ed i n h er co m p l ai n t t h at

Pi l g ri m ’ s

, Hal l

, M o u n t ai n M i l k

, an d Ri s in g were al l en g ag ed i n a “ a jo i n t ven t u re” to

g r o w

, c o ll ect

, t ran s p o rt

, an d p ro ces s ch i ck en s fo r p ro fi t

, t h e d eced en t was d eem ed

Ri s i n g ’ s em

p l o y ee at t h e t i m e t h at h e was k i l l ed

. Th i s arg u m en t i s u n p ers u as i v e.

6 In i t s b ri ef, Ri s i n g (1 ) rai s es t h e i s su e o f a p lai n t i ff’ s o b l i g at io n t o e x e r ci s e

d u e d i l i g en ce fo r h i s o w n s afet y ; (2 ) arg u es t h at a b reach o f d ut y w i l l n o t g i v e ri se to

l i ab i l i t y t o a p lai n t i ff wh o co u l d h av e a v o i d e d i n ju ry t o h im s el f b y t h e ex erci s e o f

o rd i n ary care; an d (3 ) p o s i t s t h at t h e d eced en t c o u l d h av e av oi d ed b ei ng k i l l ed by

s i m pl y s t ay i n g o u t o f t h e l o ad i n g zo n e. Ri s i n g d i d n o t arg u e t h es e g ro u n d s i n i t s

m o ti o n fo r s u m

m ary ju d g m en t o r at t h e h eari n g on t he m o ti o n

. In th e fact s ect i o n o f

i t s m o t i o n

, Ri s in g cu r sor ily m en t i o n ed t es t i m o ny t h at th e d eced en t “ k n ew b et t er” t h an

t o b e i n th e l o ad i n g zo n e an d s h o u l d n o t h av e b een th ere. Bu t we do n o t co n s t r u e

Ri s i n g ’ s s i n g l e s en t en ce i n t h i s reg ard as an arg u m en t s u ffi ci en t en o ug h fo r u s to

affi rm t he t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f su m m ary ju d g m en t o n t h e b as i s t h at Ri s i n g n o w u rg es

o n ap p eal

. See Geo rg i a-Pa ci f i c, LLC v. Fi el d

s

, 29 3 Ga. 49 9

, 5 0 4 (2 ) (7 4 8 SE2 d 4 0 7 )

(2 0 1 3 ) ( h o l d i n g t hat t h i s Co u rt co u l d n o t affi rm t h e tri al co u rt ’ s gran t o f s u m m ary

ju d g m en t o n t h e b as i s o f cau s at i o n

, wh i ch was n o t rai s ed in t h e pl ai nt i ffs ’ s u m m ary

ju d g m en t m o t io n).

17It i s t ru e t h at “ o n e jo i n t v en tu rer i s i m m u n e fro m t o r t l i ab i l i t y t o i t s jo i nt

v en tu rer’ s em

p l o y ees .” S

ecki n g er & Co

. v. Fo r ema n

, 2 5 2 Ga. 5 4 0

, 5 4 1 (2 ) (3 1 4 SE2 d

8 9 1 ) (1 98 4 ). “ A jo i n t v en t ure ari s es wh ere t wo or m o re part i es co m b i n e t hei r p ro p ert y

o r lab o r, o r b o t h

, i n a j o i n t u n d ert ak i n g fo r p ro fi t, wi t h ri g h t s o f m u t u al co n tro l

(p ro v i d ed t h e arran g em en t do es n o t es t ab l i s h a p art ners h i p ), s o as to ren d er al l jo i nt

v en tu rers l i ab l e fo r t h e n eg l ig en ce o f t h e o th er.” (Ci tat i on an d pu n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed .)

W i l l ia ms v. Ch i c k

- f i l

- A, In c.

, 27 4 Ga. Ap p

. 1 6 9

, 17 0 (6 1 7 SE2 d 1 5 3 ) (2 0 0 5 ). Fo r a

jo i n t v en t u re t o ex i s t

, h o wev er, “ t h ere m u s t b e n ot o nl y a jo i n t i n t eres t i n t h e p u rp o s e

o f t h e en t erp ri s e

. . . b u t al s o an eq u al ri g h t

, ex pres s o r i m p l i ed

, t o d i rect an d co n tro l

t h e co n d u ct o f o n e an o t h er i n t h e act i v i t y cau s i n g t h e i n ju ry .” (Ci t at i o n an d

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

. “ T h e q u es t i on o f wh et her o r no t t h e f a c t s p ro v ed s h o w a

jo i n t ad v en t u re b et ween th e p art i es

. . . i s g en eral l y a ju r y q u e s t i o n .” (Ci t at i on s

o m it t ed .) Bo wma n v. Fu l l er , 8 4 Ga. Ap p . 4 2 1 , 4 2 6 (1 ) (6 6 SE2 d 2 4 9 ) (1 9 5 1 ).

Ri s i ng ’ s arg u m en t fai l s b ecau s e, d es p i t e M u l l in ax ’ s al l eg at i o n o f a jo i nt

v en tu re co m

po s ed o f al l th e d efen d an t s

, t he reco rd s t i l l s h o w s a fact q u es t i o n o n t h i s

i s su e. See Geo r

g i a -Pa ci f i c, LLC v. Fi el d

s

, 2 9 3 Ga. 49 9

, 5 0 2 (7 4 8 SE2 d 4 07 ) (2 0 1 3 )

(al t h ou g h t h e p art y t h at m ad e th e ad m is s io n “ co u l d n o t es t ab l i sh as a m at t er o f l aw

t h at t h e ad m i ss i o n s were u n t ru e,” t h e p art y “ co ul d rai s e an i s su e o f fact fo r a ju ry to

18d et erm i n e”) (p u nct u at io n om i t t ed ). Fi rs t

, th e b ro il er cat ch i n g an d l o ad i n g ag reem en t

b et ween Pi l g ri m ’ s an d Ri s i n g ex p l i ci t l y s t at es , “ [t ] h is Ag reem en t i s n o t i n t en d ed t o

creat e an d s h al l n o t be co n s t ru ed as creat i n g b et ween t h e p art i es heret o a rel at i o n s h ip

o f p ri n ci p al an d ag en t

, jo in t v e n t u res [s i c]

. . . o r an y o t h er s i m i l ar rel at i o n s h i p

, t h e

ex i s t en ce o f wh i ch i s h e r e b y ex p res s l y d en i ed b y t he p art i es .” Co m p are Fo r ema n

,

s u p ra, 2 5 2 Ga. at 5 4 1 (1 ) (ev i d en ce au t h o ri zed a fi n d i ng t h a t t w o en t i t i es were

en g ag ed i n a jo i n t v en tu re becau se t h ei r co n t ract ual ag reem en t was s peci fi cal l y

d en om i n at ed a jo i n t v en tu re ag reem en t an d p ro vi d ed t h at i t s h o u l d b e co n s t ru ed an d

d eem ed t o b e a jo in t ven t u re). Ad d it i o n al l y

, Ri s i n g p o i n ts t o n o reco rd ev id en ce t h at

i t h ad a ri g h t t o d i r e ct an d co n t ro l t h e co n d u ct o f t h e em p l o y ees o f t h e o t h er

d efen d an t s o r Mo u n t ai n M i l k . Th u s , d es p i te M u ll i nax ’ s al l eg at i o n i n h er co m p l ai nt

t h at Pi l g ri m ’ s

, Ri si n g

, Hal l an d M o u n t ai n M i l k were en g ag ed i n a j o i n t v en t u re, t h e

reco rd s h o ws a gen u i n e i s s u e o f m at eri al fact i n t hi s reg ard

, an d we can no t affi rm t h e

g ran t o f s u m

m ary ju d g m en t t o Ri s i n g o n t h es e g ro u n ds

.

Becau s e fact i s s u es rem ai n reg ard i n g wh et h er Ri s i ng b reach ed i t s du t y o f care

t o ward t h e d eced en t an d pro xi m at el y cau s ed hi s i nju ri es

, an d Ri s i n g i s n o t e n t i t l ed

t o t o rt i m m u ni ty u n der th e W o rk ers ’ Co m p en s at i o n Act as a m at t er o f l aw, w e rev ers e

t h e t ri al co urt ’ s g ran t o f s u m m ary ju d g m en t t o Ri s in g

.

19Ca s e No . A1 9 A1 9 0 1

3

. In t h e fi n al cas e, M u l l i n ax ap p eal s fro m t he t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f s u m m ary

j u d g m en t t o Hal l

, t he o wn er o f t h e farm

. M ul l i n ax co n t en ds t h at (1 ) t h e t ri al co u rt

erro neo u s l y g ran t ed s u m

m ary ju d g m en t t o Hal l o n g ro u n ds t h at were n ot rai s ed i n t h e

p l ead i n g s

, i .e., t h at t h e d eced en t h ad eq u al o r su p eri o r k no wl ed g e o f t h e l ack o f

l i gh t in g o n t h e farm an d as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f i n ju ry ; an d (2 ) ev i d en ce s h o w ed t h at Hal l

b reach ed h i s d u ty o f ord in ary care. W e d et erm i n e t h at t h ere i s a fact i s s u e reg ard i n g

wh et h er Hal l w as n e g l i g en t as t he p rem is es own er, an d t he tri al co u rt erred in

g ran t i n g s u m

m ary ju d gm en t i n Hal l’ s fav o r.

a. Fa ct i ss u es exi s t

r eg ar d i n g

wh et h er Ha l l b r ea ch ed

a d u t y o f ca re.

“ Geo rg i a p rem i s es li ab i l i t y l a w h ol d s o w n er/ o ccu p iers o f l an d l iab l e fo r

d am ag es s u ffered b y an i n v i t ee o n t h ei r pro p ert y wh ere t he i nv i t ee’ s i n ju ri es were

c a u s ed b y t he o wn er/ o ccu pi er’ s fai l ure t o ex erci s e o rd i n ary care i n k eep i n g t h e

p rem i s es an d ap p ro ach es s afe.” (Ci t at i o n om i t t ed .) Ga r ci a v. KRC Al der wo o d Tr a i l s

,

LLC , 3 4 8 Ga. Ap p. 8 4

, 8 8 (8 1 9 SE2 d 7 1 3 ) (2 0 1 8). See OCGA § 5 1 -3 -1

.

W h i l e n o t an i ns u rer o f t h e i n v it ee’ s s afet y

, t h e own er/ o ccu p i er i s

req u ired t o ex erci s e o rd i n ary care t o p ro t ect t he i nv i tee fro m

u n reas o n ab l e ri s k s of h arm o f wh i ch t h e own er/ o ccu pi er h as s u p eri o r

k n o wl ed g e. Th e o wn er/ o ccu p i er o wes p ers o n s i n v i t ed t o en t er th e

20p rem i s es a d u t y o f o rd i n ary care t o h av e th e prem i ses in a reas o n ab l y

s afe co n d i t i o n an d n o t t o ex p o s e t h e i n vi t ees t o u n reas o n ab l e ri s k o r t o

l ead t h em i n to a d an g ero u s t rap

. T h e o wn er/ o ccu p i er i s n o t req u i red t o

warran t t h e s afet y o f al l p ers o n s fro m al l t h in g s, b u t t o ex erci s e t he

d i l i g en ce t o ward m ak i ng t h e p rem i s es s afe t h at a g oo d b u s i n es s p ers o n

i s accu s to m ed t o u s e i n s u ch m at t ers

.

(Ci t at i o n o m i t t e d .) Ga rci a

, s u p ra, 3 4 8 G a. Ap p

. at 8 8

. “ Th e ‘ ro u t i n e’ i s s u es o f

p rem i s es l i ab i li t y

, i

. e

. , t h e n eg l i g en ce o f t he d efen d an t an d t h e pl ai nt i ff, an d t h e

p l ai n t i ff’ s l ack o f o rd i n ary care fo r p ers o nal s af e t y a r e g e n eral l y n o t s u s cep t i b le o f

s u m m ary ad ju di cat i o n

, an d su m

m ary ju d g m en t i s gran t ed o n l y wh en t h e ev i d en ce i s

p l ai n

, pal p ab l e, an d u n d is p ut ed .” (Ci t at i o n

, p u nct u at i o n

, an d em p h as i s o m i t t ed .) Id

.

at 8 7 -8 8

.

Pu t t in g as i d e t h e i s s u e o f wh et h er Hal l p ro vi ded ad eq uat e l i g h t i n g o n t h e farm

,

t h e reco rd st i ll s ho ws a fact i s s u e as t o wh et h er H al l breach ed h i s d ut y o f care t o t h e

d eced en t . Hal l t es t i fi ed t h at h e h as l o n g b een aro u n d fo rk l i ft s o n ch i ck en farm s an d

t h at t h e “ n um

b er on e fear” as s o ci at ed wi t h fo rk l i ft s i s th at o f s tri k in g p ed es t ri an s o r

o b ject s

. He fu rt h er ex p lai n ed

, “ [i ] t ’ s a v ery dan g ero us o p erat i o n

. . . . ” H al l k n ew, t o o,

h o w q u i ck l y t h e fo rk l i ft s en t ered an d ex i t ed th e ch i ck en h ou s es

. H e t es t i fi ed

, t h o u g h,

t h at t h ere i s n o d es i g n at ed fo rk li ft p at h o n h i s farm

, n o r i s th ere a s peci fi ed p ed es t ri an

21v ers u s fo rk l i ft area. M u l l i n ax ’ s e x p e r t av erred th at t h es e fai l u res “ fel l b el o w t h e

s t an d ard o f care an d creat ed an u n s afe co n d it i on .” A s s uch

, th ere i s a fact i s s u e as to

wh et h er Hal l fai l ed t o ex erci s e o rd i n ary care t o k eep t h e p rem i s es s afe.

W h i l e t h e t ri al co urt ru l ed t h at t h e d eced en t v o l u n t a r i ly as s u m ed t h e ri s k o f

i n ju ry b y t rav ers i n g t h e a r ea i n wh i ch t h e fo rk l i ft was b ei n g o p erat ed

, Hal l h ad t h e

b u rd en o f rai si n g t h i s affi rm at i v e d efen se an d p ro vi n g t hat n o fact i s s ue rem ai n ed

,

b o t h o f wh i ch h e fai l ed t o do

. Teems v. Ba t es

, 3 0 0 Ga. A p p

. 7 0

, 7 2 (1 ) (6 8 4 SE2 d

6 6 2 ) (2 0 0 9 ) (n o t i ng t hat as s um p t i o n o f t h e ri s k is an affi rm at iv e d efen s e); Keen e

,

s u p ra, 2 25 G a. Ap p

. at 1 16 (1 ). Hal l di d n o t arg u e th at th e d eced en t as s u m ed t h e ri s k

o f i n j u ry b y b ei n g i n t h e l oad i n g zo n e, m u ch l es s s at i s fy h is b u rd en o f p ro o f, an d s o

we can n o t affi rm on t h es e g ro u n d s

. See Ha yg o o d v. Hea d

, 3 05 G a. A p p

. 3 7 5

, 3 7 8 (1 )

(6 9 9 SE2 d 5 8 8) (2 0 1 0 ) (“ A t ri al co u rt i s wi t h o u t au t ho ri t y t o as s ert o n a d efen d an t ’ s

b e hal f affi rm at i v e d efen s es t h at can b e wai v ed

. . . .”) (ci t at io n o m i t t ed ). 7 T h u s

, t h e

7 Th e t ri al co u rt al s o ru l ed t h at t h e d eced en t’ s kn o w l ed g e of th e ri s k o f wo rk i n g

i n t h e d ark wi th fo rk l i f

t s o p erat i n g nearb y was eq u al o r s u p eri o r t o Hal l ’ s, an d t h at

Hal l was ju s ti fi ed i n as s um i n g t h at t h e d eced en t wo u l d real ize t h e ri s k i n t rav ers i n g

t h e u n l i t p rem i s es

. T h i s ru li n g was i n res p o ns e t o Mu l l in ax ’ s arg um en t t h at H al l was

n eg li g en t b ecau s e t h e ch i ck en h o u se p rem i s es l ac k ed ad eq uat e ex t eri o r l i g h t i n g

. In

h er b r i e f i n g

, h o wev er, Mu l l i n ax cl earl y rai s ed a s ep arat e an d di s t i n ct s o u rce o f

al l eg ed n eg l i g en ce o n Hal l ’ s p art w h i ch t h e t r i a l co u rt ’ s o rd er d i d n o t ad d res s

, i

. e.,

t h at Hal l fai led t o p ro v i d e an y d es i gn at ed l o a d i n g zo n e an d an y m ark ed p ed es t ri an

v ers u s fo rk l ift areas

.

22t ri al co u rt erred i n g ran ti n g s u m m ary ju d g m en t o n th e b as i s th at th e d e c e d e n t h ad

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

j ury b y bei n g i n t h e l o a d i n g z o n e, an d we can no t affi rm o n

t h es e g ro u n d s

. Ho d

g e v. S A DA En t er

p r is es

, In c.

, 2 1 7 Ga. Ap p

. 68 8

, 6 9 0 (1 ) (4 5 8

SE2 d 8 7 6) (1 9 9 5).

b . Ha l l d i d n o t s ur r en d

er t he p r emi s es a s a ma tt er o f l aw.

Co n trary t o h i s arg u m en t, Hal l is n ot ab s ol ved o f l i ab i l i t y as a m at t er o f l aw o n

t h e b as i s t h at h e h ad s u rren d ered t h e p rem is es o r a p o rt i o n t h ereo f.

If th e o wn er s u rren d ers a p o rt i o n o f t h e p re m i s es t o an i n d ep en d en t

co n t ract o r, t h e o wn er i s rel i ev ed o f h i s d u ti es wi t h reg ard t o th e p o rt i o n

o f t h e p rem i s es wh i ch h e n o l o n g er co n t ro l s

. In t h i s reg ard

, p o ss es s i o n

ma y b e d ef i n ed a s h a vi n g p er

s o n a l ch a rg e o

f o r exer ci s i n g t h e r ig h ts o f

m a n a gemen t o r co n tr o l o ver t h e pr o per t y i n q u es t i o n

. Cu s t o d y a n d

co n t ro l are t h e co m

m o n ly accep ted an d g en eral l y u n d ers t o od i n ci d en t s

o f p o s s es s i o n

. T ak i n g al l o f t h es e p ri nci p l es t o get h er, we h av e h el d t hat

al t h o u g h p ro p ert y o w n ers o we a d u t y t o t h ei r o wn i nv i tees

, t h ey owe n o

s u ch d u ty t o em

p l o y ees o f o r o t h ers in v i t ed up o n th e p rem i ses b y an

i n d ep en d en t co n t ract o r h i red t o d o w o r k o n t h e p rem i s es i f t wo

co n d i t i o n s ex i s t : 1 ) t h e o wn er has rel i n q u is h ed p o ss es s io n o f th e

p rem i s es , i n wh o l e o r in p art

, an d 2 ) th e own er do es n o t h av e t h e ri g h t

an d d o es no t act u al l y

co n t ro l o r d i rect t h e wo rk d on e

.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ; em p has i s s up p li ed .) W

es t v. Br i g g s & S t r a t t o n

Co r p

. , 2 4 4 Ga. Ap p . 8 4 0, 8 44 -8 4 5 (5 3 6 SE2 d 8 2 8 ) (2 0 0 0 ).

23T h e r e i s at l eas t a fact i s su e reg ard in g wh et h er H al l h ad rel i n q u i s h ed

p o s s es s i o n o f t h e p rem i s es

, ei t h er i n wh o l e o r in p art

, s o as t o i n su l at e hi m fr o m

p rem i s es l i ab i l i ty

. 8 “ [P] o s s es si o n i m p l i es th e ab i li t y t o co n tro l acces s t o t h e p rem i s es

an d t o ex cl u de o t h ers t h e r e f r o m .” W es t

, s u p ra, 2 4 4 Ga. A p p

. at 8 4 6

. Hal l i d en t i fi es

n o ev i d en ce s ho wi n g t hat h e s u rren d ered t h e ab i l i t y t o e x cl u d e o th ers fro m h i s

p ro p ert y o r t h e p o rt i o n o f t h e prem i ses i n wh i ch th e d eced en t was i nju red

. W h i l e Hal l

em ph as i zes th at h e d o es n o t co n t ro l t h e cat ch o p erat i o n o r crews an d he l eft t h e area

aft er h e rai sed th e ch i ck en s ’ d ri n k an d feed l i n es

, t h i s ev i d en ce co rrel at es wi t h a l ack

o f co n t ro l ov er t h e wo r k i t s el f

, n o t a rel i n q u i s h m en t o f p o ss es s i o n o f t h e prem i s es

.

“ [W ] h et h er t h e o wn er ret ai n s co n t ro l o v er t he wo rk o f an i nd ep en d en t co n t ract o r i s

a s ep arat e q u es t i o n fro m

wh et h er i t rel in q u i s h ed po s ses s i o n o f t h e p rem i s es t o s u ch

co n tract or. On l y i f b o t h co n di t i o n s are s at i s fi ed i s t h e o wn er rel i ev ed o f an y d u t y

t o ward i n v i t ees .” W

es t

, s u p r a

, 2 4 4 G a. Ap p. at 8 4 4 -8 4 5

. T h u s

, we can n o t ho l d as a

m at t er o f l aw t h at Hal l rel i n q u is h ed p o s s es s i o n o f t h e p rem i s es i n wh ol e or i n p art

,

s o as t o i n s ul at e h i m fro m p o t en t i al l i ab i l i t y as t he o wn er of t he p rem i s es

. See

8 In an affi d av i t

, Ha l l s t at ed t h at h e “ s u rren der[ed ] p o ss es s i o n an d co n t ro l o f

t h e p ro p ert y t o t h e cat ch crew” o n t h e i n ci den t d at e. Th i s as s ert i on

, h owev er, i s

m erel y a co n cl us i on an d i s n o t s u ffi ci en t t o s up p o rt a m o t io n fo r s u m m ary ju d g m en t

. Ca n t er a v. Amer i ca n Her i t a g e Li fe In s

. Co

. , 2 7 4 Ga. Ap p

. 3 0 7

, 3 1 1 (6 1 7 SE2 d 2 5 9 )

(2 0 0 5).

24Jo h ns o n v. Ki m b er l y Cl a r k

, 2 3 3 Ga. Ap p

. 5 0 8

, 51 0 -5 1 1 (5 0 4 S E2 d 5 3 6 ) (1 9 9 8 )

(b ecau s e t h ere was n o ev id en ce t h at th e i n d ep en den t co n t ract o r h ad fu l l an d co m p l et e

co n tro l o f t h e p rem i s es wh ere pai n t i n g was b ei n g d o n e

, e v e n o n a t em p o rary b as i s

,

a fact i s s ue ex i s t ed as t o co n t ro l o f t h e p rem i s es ); To wl es v. Co x

, 1 8 1 Ga. Ap p

. 1 9 4,

1 9 5 -1 9 6 (1 ) (3 5 1 SE2 d 7 1 8) (1 9 8 6 ) (ju ry was au t ho ri zed t o r e s o l v e th e q u es t i o n

wh et h er o u t -o f-t o w n d e f e nd an t h ad d el i v ered fu l l an d co m p let e co n t ro l o f t h e

s i dewal k wh ere p l a i n t i f

f was i n ju red b y a j ack h am m er o p erat ed b y an i n d ep en d en t

co n tract or).

c. Immu n i t y u n d er t h e W o r ker s ’ Co mp en s a t i on Act

Las t ly

, si m i lar to t h e p o s i t i o n t ak en b y Ri s in g

, Ha l l al s o arg u es t hat h e i s

en t i t l ed t o i m

m u n i t y u n d er t h e ex cl u s i v i t y p ro vi s i o n o f t he W o rk ers ’ Co m p en s at i o n

Act b ecau s e M u l l i n ax p ro v i d ed a ju d i ci al ad m i s s i o n th at Pi l g ri m ’ s

, Ri si ng

, Hal l

, an d

M o u nt ai n M i l k were al l i n a j o i n t v en t u re. Ev en as s u m i ng th at M u l l i n ax m ad e s u ch

a ju d i ci al ad m i s s io n, t hi s i s s u e i s n o t d et erm i n ab le as a m at t er o f law. See Fi el d s

,

s u p ra, 2 9 3 Ga. at 5 0 2

. Pi l gri m ’ s b ro i l er p ro d u ct io n ag reem en t wi t h H al l s t a t e d,

“ In dep en d en t Gro wer wi l l n ei th er rep res en t no r h o l d it s el f o u t t o b e an em p l o y ee,

ag en t, p art n er, rep res en t at i ve o r jo i n t v en tu re [s i c] o f o r w i t h [Pi l g ri m ’ s ] .” Al s o

, Hal l

ex p li ci t l y av erred t h at h e leav es t h e area wh ere t h e ch i ck en cat ch es occu r an d al l o ws

25t h e crew t o p erfo rm t h ei r jo b as t h ey

s ee fi t . Th u s

, t h e reco rd d o es n o t d em o n s t rat e,

as a m at t er o f l aw, th at Hal l co u l d d i rect an d co n tro l t h e c o n d u c t o f an y em p l o y ees

o f Pi l g ri m ’ s

, Ri s i ng

, o r M o u nt ai n M i l k , s o as t o b e co n s i dered a jo i n t v en t u rer wi th

t h es e en t i t i es

.

Becau s e t here i s a g en ui n e i s s u e o f m at eri al fact as t o wh et h er Hal l b reach ed

h i s d u t y o f care, an d Hal l i s n o t e n t it l ed t o t o rt i m m u n i t y as a m at t er o f l aw, we

rev ers e t he t ri al co u rt ’ s g ran t o f s u m m ary ju dg m en t t o Hal l

.

To s u m m ari ze, i n Cas e No

. A1 9 A 1 8 9 9

, w e affi rm th e g ran t o f s u m m ary

ju d g m en t t o Pi lg ri m ’ s

, b u t i n Cas e No s . A1 9 A 1 9 0 0 an d A1 9 A 1 9 0 1

, we rev ers e t h e

g ran t o f s u m

m ary ju d g m en t t o Ri s i n g an d Hal l , res p ect iv el y

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r med i n Ca s e No

. A1 9

A1 89 9

, j u d

g men t r ever

s ed in Ca s e No

.

A1 9 A 1 9 0 0

, ju d

g men t r ever

s e d i n Ca s e No

. A1 9

A1 9 01

. Ri ckma n a n d Rees e, JJ.,

co n cu r

.

26