THI RD DI VI SI ON

ELLI NGTON, P. J.

, A NDREWS and RI CKM A N, 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 14, 2018



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A1 7 A1 94 4 . HANDBERRY v . STUCKEY TIM BERLAND, INC.

E LLI N G T O N , Pres i d i n g J ud g e.

M ari e Ha n d b e rry , as s urv i v i n g s p o u se an d ex ecu t o r o f t h e es t at e o f W i l l i am

Do n al d H an d b erry , Sr., (“ t he d eced en t ”) co n t en ds t h at t h e Su p eri o r Co u rt o f Do d g e

Co u n t y erred i n d i sm i s s i n g p art o f h er wro ng fu l d eat h co m p lai n t ag ai n s t St u ck ey

Ti m b erl an d

, In c. (“ St u ck ey ”). Becau s e t h e t ri al co u rt p ro p erl y g ran t ed S t u ck ey ’ s

p art i al m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s fo r fai l u re t o s t a t e a cl ai m g i v en t h e ap p li cab i li t y o f t h e

Recreat i o n al Pro p ert y A ct

, OCGA § 5 1 -3 -2 0 et s eq ., (“ th e RPA”) an d OCGA § 2 7 -3

-

1 (e), wh i ch ex t en ds t h e pro tect i o n s o f t h e RPA t o own ers wh o al l o w en t ry o n t o t h ei r

l an d fo r h u n t in g , we affi rm

.

On ap p eal o f a t ri al co u rt ’ s r u l i n g o n a m o ti o n t o di s m i s s , o u r rev i ew i s d e

n o v o

. Pen n

y v. McBr i d

e , 2 82 Ga. Ap p

. 5 9 0 (6 3 9 SE2 d 5 6 1) (2 0 0 6 ). “ H o we v e r , weco n st ru e t h e pl ead i ng s i n t he l i g h t m o s t fav o rab l e t o t h e p l ai n t i ff wi t h an y d o u b t s

res o l ved i n th e p l ai n t i ff

’s f av or.” (Ci t at i on an d p u nct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). Ga

. Dep t

. of

Co mmu n i t

y Hea lt h v. Da t a In q u i r

y , 3 1 3 Ga. Ap p

. 6 8 3 (7 2 2 SE2 d 4 0 3) (2 0 1 2 ). Ou r

ro l e i s “ t o d et erm i ne wh et her t h e al l eg at i o n s o f t h e co m p l ai n t

, wh en co n st ru ed i n t h e

l i gh t m o s t fav orab l e t o t h e p lai n t iff, an d wi t h al l d o ub t s res o l v ed i n t h e p l ai n t i ff ’ s

fav o r, d is cl o s e wi t h cert ai n t y t hat t h e p l ai n t i ff wo u l d n ot b e en t i t l ed to rel i ef u n d er

a n y s t at e o f p ro v ab le fact s.” (Ci t at i o n , pu n ct u at i o n an d fo o t n o t e om i t t ed .) Pen n y v

.

McBr i d e , 2 8 2 Ga. A p p

. at 5 9 0

. See al s o S o u t h wes t Hea l t h & W

el l n es s v. W

o r k

, 2 8 2

Ga. Ap p

. 6 1 9

, 6 2 3 (2 ) (6 3 9 SE2 d 5 7 0 ) (2 0 0 6 ) (o n ap p eal o f a m o ti o n fo r ju d g m en t

o n t h e p lead i n g s , “ t he is s u e i s wh et her th e u n d i s p u t ed fact s ap p eari n g fro m t h e

p l ead i n g s en t i t l e t h e m o v an t t o ju d g m en t as a m a t t e r o f l aw”) (ci t at i o n an d

p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ). Ad d i ti o n al l y , wh en ru l i ng o n a m o t io n to d is m i ss fo r fai l u re to

s t at e a cl ai m o r a m o ti o n fo r ju d g m en t o n t h e p lead i n g s , t h e co u rt s m ay co n s i d er

wri t ten i n s t ru m en t s at t ach ed to an d i n co rp o rat ed i n to t h e co m p l ai n t an d an s wer. 1 See

OCGA § 9 -1 1 -1 0 (c) (“ A co p y o f an y wri t t en i n s t ru m en t w h i ch i s an ex h i b i t t o a

p l ead i n g i s a p art t hereo f fo r al l p u r p o s e s.”); Tr o p

, In c. v. Ci ty o

f Br o o kh a ven , 2 9 6

1 In g ran ti n g t h e m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s , t h e s u p eri o r co urt co ns i d ered t h e t erm s o f t h e h u n t i n g l eas e, wh i ch was at t ach ed t o an d i n co rp o rat ed i n t o St u ck ey ’ s an s wer.

2Ga. 85

, 89 ( 2 ) (7 6 4 SE2 d 3 9 8) (2 0 1 4 ); S h el n ut t v. Ma

yo r a n d Al d

er men o f t h e Ci t y

o f S a va n n a h , 3 3 3 Ga. Ap p . 4 4 6 (7 7 6 SE2 d 6 5 0 ) (2 0 1 5 ).

H a n d b e rry al l eg ed t h at St u ck ey own s an d m an ag es real es t at e i n m i d d l e

Geo rg i a, i n cl u d in g 4 8 8

. 92 acres i n J effers o n Co u nt y. I n J u ne 2 0 1 5, St u ck ey l eas ed

t h e J effers o n Co u n t y p ro pert y t o Ro b bi e Bret t “ o n l y fo r fi s hi n g an d h u n t i n g

p u rp os es

. ” T h e l eas e ex p res s l y co n tem pl at ed th at Bret t ’ s “ ag en t s , s erv an t s ,

em pl o y ees , an d g u es ts ” w o u l d b e p erm i t t ed acces s t o th e p ro pert y

. It fu rt h er p ro v i d ed

t h at n o g ues t o f Bret t ’s “ s h a l l at an y t i m e ex erci s e an y

. . . ri g h t or p ri v i leg e [u n d er

t h i s ag reem en t ] ex cep t an d i n acco rd an ce wi t h t hi s ag reem en t ” an d o n l y aft er s i g n i n g

a rel eas e an d i n dem n i t y ag reem en t i n fav o r o f St u ck ey

.

Aft er en t eri n g i n t o th e l eas e, Bret t fo rm ed a h u n t in g cl u b w i t h s ev eral fri en d s ,

i n cl u d i n g t h e d eced en t, wh o p ai d a p o rt io n o f t he co s t o f Bret t ’ s leas e s o t hat h e co u ld

s h are i n th e ri gh t t o en t er t h e p ro p ert y an d hu n t

. On J ul y 2 5

, 2 0 1 5, t h e d e c e d en t

en t ered on t o t h e p ro p ert y t o l o o k “ at t he p ro p ert y i n p rep arat i on fo r h u n t i n g t h ere at

a l at er t i m e.” He ro d e a fo u r-wh eel v eh i cl e o v er an ab an do n ed wel l co n ceal ed b y t al l

g ras s , an d t h e v eh i cl e fl i p p ed o v er. He was eject ed fro m t h e v eh i cl e an d t rap p ed

i n s i d e t h e wel l , wh ere h e d i ed

.

3Han d b e r r y s u ed St u ck ey , al l eg i n g t h at i t had b o t h act u al an d co n s t ru ct i v e

k n o wl ed g e o f t h e wel l

, t h at i t h ad a d u ty to warn ag ai n s t d an g ero u s co nd i t i o ns o n t h e

p ro p ert y , t h at i t was req u i red t o i n s p ect t h e p ro p ert y , t h at it s co n d u ct was wi l l fu l an d

m al i ci o u s as wel l as n eg l i gen t

, an d t h at i t ’ s act io n s h ad p ro xi m at el y cau s ed h er

h u s b an d ’ s d eat h

. In t h e fact u al av erm en t s o f t h e co m p l ai n t

, Han d berry al leg ed t h at

t h e d eced en t was “ n o t h un t i n g ” at t h e t i m e o f t h e i n ci d en t

, b u t t h at h e was s co u t i n g

h u n t i n g l o cat i o n s

. St u ck ey fi l ed a p art i al m o t i o n t o d i s m i s s , p art i al m o t i o n fo r

ju d g m en t o n t h e p l ead i n g s , an d m o t i o n t o s t ri k e, as ki n g t he co urt to di sm i s s cl ai m s

b as ed o n o rd i n ary n eg l i g en ce an d t o s t ri k e an y referen ces t o co n s tru ct i v e k n o wl ed g e

an d a d u t y to i n s p ect

. St u ck ey arg u ed t h at ei t h er: (1 ) t he d eced en t was o n th e p ro p ert y

fo r hu n ti n g p u r p o s es , i n wh i ch cas e t he RPA p recl u d ed li ab i l it y fo r cl ai m s o f

n eg li g en ce ag ai n s t St u ck ey ; o r (2 ) t h e d eced en t was n o t o n th e p ro p ert y fo r h u n t i n g

p u rp os es , i n wh i ch cas e h e was t res p as si ng , an d St u c k e y co ul d o n l y b e l i ab l e fo r

cau s i n g wi l l fu l an d wan t o n i nju ry , wh ich req u i res act u al kn o w l ed g e o f t h e p eri l

. Th e

t ri al co urt ag reed

, g ran t in g t h e p art i al m o t io n t o d i s m i s s a n d m o t i o n t o s t ri k e “ [a] l l

al l eg at i o n s o f n eg l i g en ce an d co n s tru ct i v e k n o wl ed g e[.] ” Th e t ri al co u rt d i d n ot

4d i s m i s s t h o s e c l a i m s b as ed u p o n act u al k n o wl ed g e o f t h e p eri l an d wi l l fu l o r

m al i ci ou s co n d u ct . It i s fro m t h i s o rd er t h at Han d berry ap p eal s

. 2

Th e s t at ed p u rp o se o f t h e RPA “ i s t o en co u rag e o wn ers o f l an d t o m ak e l an d

an d wat er areas av ai l ab l e t o t h e p ub l ic fo r recreat i o n al p u rp o ses by l i m i t i n g t h e

o wn ers ’ l i ab il i ty t o ward p ers on s en t eri n g t h ereo n fo r recreat i o nal p u rp o s es

. ” OCGA

§ 5 1-3 -2 0

.

In o rd er t o ach iev e t h i s p u rp o s e, t h e RPA s peci fi es t h at an o wn er o f l an d

wh o ei t h er d i rect l y o r i n d i rect l y i n v i t es or p er m i t s w i t h o u t ch arg e an y

p ers on to u s e t h e p ro p ert y fo r recreat i o n a l p u rp o ses m ay n ot b e h el d

l i ab l e fo r p ers o n al i n

ju ri es res u l t i n g fro m u n s afe or d efect i v e co n di t i o n s

ex i s ti n g o n t h e p rem i s es , u nl es s s u ch i n ju ri es res u l ted fro m wi l l fu l o r

m al i ci o u s fai l u re t o g u ard o r warn ag ai n s t a d an g ero u s co n d i t io n , us e,

s t ru ct u re, o r act iv it y

.

(Ci t at i o n s an d p un ct u at i o n o m i t t ed .) So u t h Gwi n net t A th let i c As s n

. v. Na s h

, 2 2 0 Ga.

Ap p

. 1 1 6

, 1 1 7 (1 ) (4 69 SE2 d 2 7 6 ) (1 9 9 6 ). See OCGA § § 51 -3 -2 3; 5 1 -3 -2 5 (1 ). Th e

p ro t ect i o n s o f th e RPA al s o ex t en d t o “ [a] n y o wn er o f l an d

, les s ee o f l an d

, o r l es s ee

o f t h e g am e o r fi s h in g ri g h t s t o l an d wh o g i v es p erm i s s i o n t o an ot h er p ers o n t o h u n t

,

fi sh

, or t ak e wi l d l i fe u p o n t h e l an d wi t h o r wi t h o u t ch arg e[.] ” OCGA § 2 7 -3 -1 (e). In

2 Th i s Co u rt gran t ed Han d b erry ’ s ap pl i cat i o n fo r an i n t erl o cu t o ry ap p eal t o co n s i d er

t h e ap p li cat i o n o f t h e RPA u n d er t h e ci rcu m st an ces o f t h i s cas e.

5o r d e r t o es t ab l i s h an ex cep t i o n t o t h i s l im it at i o n o f l i ab i l i t y bas ed o n a wi l l f u l o r

m al i ci ou s fai l u re t o g u ard o r warn ag ai ns t a dan g ero u s co n d i t i o n , a p l a i n t i f f m u s t

s h o w t h at t h e o wn er h ad act u al k n o wl ed g e of t he d an gero u s co n d it i on

. Co ll i ns v. Ci t y

o f S u mmer vi l l e , 2 84 Ga. A p p

. 5 4

, 5 6 (6 4 3 SE2 d 3 0 5 ) (2 0 0 7 ). “ Co n s t ru ct i v e

k n o wl ed g e i s n o t s u f

f i c i en t

, an d n o du t y t o i n s p ect i s i m p o s ed o n t h e p ro p ert y

o wn er.” (Fo o t n o t e om i t ted .) Id

. W h et h er t h e RPA ap p l ies t o t h e fact s o f a cas e i s a

q u es ti o n o f l aw fo r t h e co u rt

. G a yl e v. Fr a n k Ca ll en Bo

ys & Gi rl s Cl u b

, In c. , 3 2 2 Ga.

Ap p . 4 1 2 , 4 1 4 (7 4 5 SE2 d 6 9 5 ) (2 0 1 3 ).

As t h e t ri al co u rt co rrect l y d et erm in ed , t h e d eced en t ’ s v i s i t t o t h e p ro p ert y t o

s co u t it fo r fu t u re h u n t in g fel l wi t h i n t he l eg al d efi n it i on o f h u n t i ng

. See OCGA § 2 7

-

1 -2 (3 9 ) (“ ‘ Hu n ti n g ’ m ean s p u rs u i n g , sh o o t i n g, k i l li n g , t ak i n g, or cap tu ri ng wi l d l i fe

o r feral h og s

. Th i s t erm al s o i n cl u d es act s s u ch as pl aci ng , s et t i n g , d rawi n g , o r u s i n g

an y dev i ce u s ed t o t ak e wi l d l i fe o r feral ho g s , wh et h er an y s u ch act res ul ts i n t ak i n g

o r n o t

, an d i n cl u d

es ever y a ct o f a s s i s ta n ce t o a ny p er

s o n i n t aki n g o r a t t emp t i n g to

t a ke s u ch wi l d l i fe o r feral h o g s.”) (em p h as i s s u p p l i ed ). Th e d eced en t ’ s act o f s co u t i n g

h u n t i n g l o cat i o n s was an act o f as s i s tan ce t o h i m s el f an d t h e m em bers o f t he h u n t i n g

cl u b i n t h e t ak i n g o f wi l d l i fe; t h erefo re, t h e co u rt co rrect l y co n cl u d ed t h at t h e RPA

p recl u d ed l i ab il i t y u n l es s th e d eced en t ’ s d eat h was p ro x i m at el y cau s ed b y St u ck ey ’ s

6wi l l fu l o r m al i ci ou s fai l u re to g u ard o r t o warn ag ai n st a kn o wn d an g ero u s co n d i t i o n.

See C o l l i n s v. Ci t

y o f S u m mer vi l l e , 2 8 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 5 6

. In t h e al t ern at i v e, t h e t ri al

co u rt al s o co ncl u d ed t hat

, i f th e d ec e d en t was no t o n t he p ro p ert y fo r t h e p erm i t t ed

h u n t i n g p u rp o s es , h e was a t res p as ser t o wh o m St u ck ey o wed o n l y a d u ty “ t o refrai n

fro m cau s i n g a wi l l fu l an d wan t o n i n ju ry ” pu rs u an t t o OCGA § 51 -3 -3 (b ) (“ A l awfu l

p o s s es s o r o f lan d o wes n o d u t y o f care t o a t res p as s er ex cep t t o refrai n fro m cau s i n g

a wi l l fu l o r wan to n i nju ry .”). W e ag ree.

Han d b erry arg u es t hat t h e d eced en t wa s o n th e p ro p ert y wi t h Bret t ’ s

p erm i s s i o n , n o t St u ck ey ’ s

. He co n t en d s , t herefo re, t h at b ecau se St u ck ey d i d n ot

d i r ect l y g i v e t he d eced en t i ts p erm is s i o n t o b e o n t he l an d , i t i s n o t p ro t ect ed b y t h e

RPA. He arg u es t hat th e RPA, as ap p l i ed t o t h o s e wh o en t er o nt o p ro p ert y t o h u nt o r

fi sh p urs u an t t o OCGA § 2 7 -3 -1 (e), ex t en d s o n ly t o an o wn er o r l es see “ wh o g i v es

p erm i s s i o n t o a n o t h er p er s o n t o h u n t .” (Em

p h as i s s u p p l i ed .) O CGA § 27 -3 -1 (e).

Th i s arg u m en t i s wi t h o u t m eri t fo r t h e fo ll o wi n g reas o ns

.

Th e p l ai n l an g u ag e o f t h e l eas e sh o ws t h at St u ck e y h ad

, i n fact

, g i v en

p e rm i s si o n n ot j u s t t o Bret t b ut t o Bret t ’ s g u es ts t o be on t h e l eas ed p ro p ert y fo r

h u n t i n g p u rp o s es

. Th erefo re, t h e d eced en t

, as a m em b e r o f th e cl as s o f p eo p l e

au t h o ri zed t o b e o n t h e p ro p ert y , h ad St u ck ey ’ s ex p res s o r d i rect p erm i s s i on t o en t er

7u p o n t h e lan d fo r hu n t i n g p u rp o s es

. F u rt h er, ev en t ho u gh t h e l eas e d o es n ot

s p eci fi cal l y n am e t h e d eced en t an d g ran t p erm i s s i on t o h i m i n d i v i d u al l y , t h at d o es n ot

al t er t h e ap p l i cat i o n o f t h e RPA t o t h i s cas e. OCGA § 2 7 -3 -1 (e) p ro v i d es t h at

[a] n y o wn er o f l an d

, l es s ee o f l an d

, o r l es s ee of t h e g am e o r fi s h i n g

ri gh ts t o l an d w h o g i v es p erm i ss i on t o a n o th er p ers o n t o h u n t

, fi s h

, o r

t ak e w i l d l i fe u p o n t h e l an d wi t h o r w it ho u t ch arg e s ha l l b e en t i t l ed t o

t h e s a m e p r o t ect i o n f

ro m ci vi l l i a bi l it

y p ro v i d ed by Art i cl e 2 o f Ch ap t er

3 o f Ti t l e 5 1 fo r l an d o w n ers wh o al l o w t h e p u b l i c t o u se t h ei r lan d fo r

recreat i on al p u rp o s es wi t h o u t ch arg e.

Art i cl e 2 o f Ch ap t er 3 o f ti t l e 5 1 i n cl ud es OCGA § 5 1-3 -2 3

, wh i ch ex p res sl y p ro v i d es

t h at an o w n er’ s perm i s s i o n m ay b e d i rect or i n d i rect

. 3 Th o ug h Bret t

, as t h e l es s ee o f

t h e l an d

, was t h e o ne wh o p ers o n al l y i n v i t e d t h e deced en t t o u s e t h e lan d

, h e was

d o i n g so pu rs u an t t o a leas e t h at au t h o ri zed hi m t o i n v i t e g u es t s o n to t h e pro p ert y fo r

h u n t i n g p u rp o s es , t h ereb y e xte n ding S tuc ke y ’ s gran t o f p erm i s s i o n t o u se t h e p ro p ert y

fo r h un t in g p u rp o s es

. Th u s , ev en i f St u ck ey ’ s gran t of p erm i s si o n t o t h e d eced en t can

b e co n s t ru ed t o b e i n di rect t h ro u g h Bret t

, t h e RPA n ev ert h el es s ap p l ies u n der t h es e

ci rcu m s t an ces

. See OCGA § 5 1-3 -2 3.

3 OCGA § 51 -3

- 2 3 p ro v id es , i n rel ev an t p art

, t hat “ an o wn er of l an d wh o ei t h er d i rect ly o r i n di rect l y i n v i tes o r p erm i t s wi t h o u t ch arg e an y p ers o n t o u s e t h e p ro p ert y fo r

recreat i o nal p u rp o ses d oes n o t t h ereb y ” i ncu r cert ai n en u m erat ed l i ab i l i t i es

.

8W e al s o n o t e t h at

, i f t h e d eced en t h ad en tered on t o t h e p ro p ert y fo r a p u rp o s e

n o t co n t em

p l at ed u nd er t h e l eas e ag reem en t

, h i s s t at us wi th res pect t o St uck ey wo u ld

h av e b een t h at o f a t res p as s er. 4 Th e p l ai n l an g u ag e o f t h e leas e au t h o ri zes Bret t an d

h i s g u es t s to en t er o nt o t h e p ro p ert y , b u t “ o n ly fo r h u n ti n g an d fi s hi n g p u rp o s es .”

Al t h o u g h Bret t m ay h av e in v i t ed t h e d eced en t o n t o t h e p ro p ert y fo r wh at Han d b erry

arg u e s d o e s n ot q u al i fy as h u n t i n g , St u ck ey g av e n ei t h er Bret t n o r t h e d eced en t

p erm i s s i o n t o u s e t h e p ro p ert y fo r an yt h i n g o th er t h an h u n t i ng o r fi sh i n g pu rp o s es ,

an d Bret t can co n vey n o g reat er ri g ht t o us e t h e p ro p ert y t h an h e o b t ai ned u n d er t h e

l eas e. 5 Th u s , i f t h e d eced en t ’s u s e o f t h e pro p ert y was fo r an y t h i n g ot h er t h an an

au t h o ri zed p u rp o s e, i t w as wro n g fu l

, m ak in g h i m a t res pas s er. See Ma t l a ck v. Co b b

El ec. Memb er

sh i p Co r p

. , 2 8 9 G a

. A p p

. 6 32

, 6 3 3 -6 34 (6 58 SE2 d 1 37 ) (2 0 0 8 ) (a

t res pas s er i s o n e wh o , ev en t h o u g h p eacefu l ly or b y m i s t ak e, wro n g fu l l y en t ers u p o n

p ro p ert y o wn ed o r occu p i ed b y an o t h er). An d

, g en eral l y , a l an do wn er o wes n o d u t y

4 In a p rem i s es l i a b i l i t y c a s e, a p ers o n m ay h av e m o re t h an o n e s t at u s at t h e s am e

t i m e in rel at i o n t o di fferen t en t i t i es

. See, e.g ., Ch a mb er s v. P ea co ck Co n s t r

. Co

. , 1 1 5 Ga. Ap p

. 6 7 0

, 6 7 5 -6 77 (4 ), (5 ) (1 5 5 SE2 d 7 0 4 ) (1 9 6 7 ) (p lai n t i ff was i n v i t ee o f g en eral

co n t ract o r an d l i cen see o f s u b co n t ract o r).

5 See Po wel l v. No r ma n El ec. Ga l a xy , 2 5 5 Ga. Ap p

. 4 0 7

, 4 0 9 (1 ) (5 6 5 SE2 d 5 9 1 ) (2 0 0 2 ) (Pu rs u an t t o OCGA § 4 4 -7 -1 1 , a t en an t “ h as n o ri gh t s b ey o n d t h e us e o f t h e l an d

act u al l y co n v ey ed o r ren t ed .”)

9t o a t res p as s er ex cep t t o av oi d “ wi l l fu l l y o r reck les s l y i n ju r[i n g] h i m

. ” Ha r r i s o n v.

Pl a n t Imp r o vemen t Co

., In c., 2 7 3 Ga. Ap p

. 88 4

, 8 8 6 ( 2 ) ( 6 1 6 SE2 d 12 3 ) (2 0 0 5 )

(ci t i n g Tr a mmel l v. Ba i rd

, 2 6 2 G a

. 1 2 4 (4 1 3 SE2 d 4 4 5) (1 99 2 )). Fu rt h er, u n t i l t h e

l an d o wn er “ k n o ws o f t h e p eri l t o t h e tres p as s er, t h ere can b e n o d u t y t o warn t h e

t res pas s er.” (Ci t at i o n an d p unc tua tio n o m i t t ed .) Cr o s b y v. S a va n n a h El ect r ic & c. Co

. ,

1 1 4 Ga. Ap p

. 19 3

, 2 07 (1 5 0 SE2 d 5 63 ) (1 9 6 6 )

. An d th e o w n er o wes n o d u t y t o a

t res pas s er “ t o i ns p ect t h e p rem i s es o r t o p rep are a s afe p l ace fo r h is rece p t i o n.”

(Ci t at i o n s o m i t t ed .) Id . at 2 02

.

Gi v en t h e a p pl icab i l i ty o f t he RPA to t h i s cas e, H an d b erry ’ s co m p l ai nt

d i s cl os es wi t h cert ai n t y t hat s h e w o u l d n o t b e en t it l ed t o rel i ef un d er an y s t at e o f

p ro v ab l e fact s fo r h er cl ai m s o f n eg l i g en ce b as ed on co n s tru ct i ve k n o w l e d ge,

o rd i n ary d i l i g en ce, o r a d u t y t o i n s pect fo r an d t o warn o f un k n o wn peri l s

. Fo r t h es e

reas on s , Han d berry h as no t s h o wn l eg al erro r b el o w an d t h e ju dg m en t o f t he s u p eri o r

co u rt i s, t h erefo re, affi rm ed

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . An d

r ews a nd Ri ckma n , JJ., co n cu r

.

10