NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EILEEN FAST,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.
ANGELS MANAGEMENT, INC., DBA Gold Beach Resort,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 17

- 35010

D.C. No. 6:16

- cv

- 00060

- MC

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Michael J. McShane, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 18, 2018 ** Portland, Oregon
Before: McKEOWN and PAEZ, Circuit Judges, and LASNIK, *** District Judge.

Eileen Fast appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor

of Angels Management, Inc. in this diversity action alleging negligence under

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

*** The Honorable Robert S. Lasnik, United States District Judge for the Western D istrict of Washington, sitting by designation. 

# FILED

MAY 25 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

Oregon law. Fast tripped and fell over a wheel stop in a parking lot at the Gold

Beach Resort in West ern Oregon, injuring her shoulder and enduring significant
pain. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

On de novo review, s ee Reynaga v. Roseburg Forest Prod ucts , 84 7 F.3d
678, 685 (9th Cir. 2017), the district court did not err in g ranting summary
judgment to Angels Management and finding that the challenged wheel stop was
not an “unreasonably dangerous condition” on the premises. See Maas v. Willer
, 203 Or. App. 124, 133

– 34 (2005) (“A condition is not unreasonably dangerous if

the hazard arising from it would be known and understood by reasonable persons
expected to encounter the condition.” (internal quotation marks and citation
omitted) ) . Nor did the court err in finding that th e stop did not create an
“unreasonable risk of harm” giving rise to a duty to warn. See, e.g.
, Ault v. Del

Var Properties, LLC , 281 Or. App. 840, 849

– 50 (2016) ; Andrews v. R.W. Hays

Co. , 166 Or. App. 494, 505 (2000)

. The wheel stop was painted bright white, contrasting with the black asphalt
of the parking lot. It rose a few inches from the ground, and was positioned where

the ordinary person would expect it to be

— a t the head of a parking space. The
stop was in a str aight row of several such wheel stops. It was located a few feet
from a row of columns holding up the resort convention center roof, and several

more feet from the actual convention center doors. Fast tripped over the stop in3

broad daylight. The area, i ncluding the stop , was dry and in normal condition.
The stop was not an unreasonably dangerous condition, nor did it present an
unreasonable risk of harm that might give rise to liability. See Glorioso v. Ness
, 191 Or. App. 637, 645 (2004) (“ A step located in a place where steps normally
may be found . . . with no deceptive lighting, not covered with slippery substances,
and with no established history of causing injury, does not pose an unreasonable

risk of harm

. ”)

. We adopt the detailed and well

- re asoned analysis in the district court’s order

entered December 16, 2016.

AFFIRMED.