Court Opinion

ID: 9404693
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-23 21:00:29.325357+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:16.431821
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 21-2034      Doc: 22         Filed: 06/22/2023    Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 21-2034

        MAYTHAM AL-TAIE,

                            Plaintiff – Appellant,

                     v.

        SEVEN C’S BUILDING MAITENANCE, INC.,

                            Defendant – Appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
        Timothy J. Sullivan, Magistrate Judge. (8:20−cv−00298−TJS)

        Submitted: March 21, 2023                                         Decided: June 22, 2023

        Before HARRIS, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Ryan P. Richie, WILSON & PARLETT, Upper Marlboro, Maryland, for
        Appellant. Michael L. Pivor, KIERNAN TREBACH LLP, Washington, D.C., for
        Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 21-2034       Doc: 22        Filed: 06/22/2023      Pg: 2 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Maytham Al-Taie appeals a district court order granting summary judgment to

        Seven C’s Building Maintenance, Inc. (“SCBM”) in Al-Taie’s personal injury action. On

        appeal, Al-Taie argues that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the

        ground that Al-Taie was contributorily negligent as a matter of law when he walked out

        onto a marble floor that was being mopped by employees of SCBM and then slipped and

        fell on the wet floor.

               We review a district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, and “view the

        evidence and all reasonable inferences from it in the light most favorable to the non-moving

        party.” Lee Graham Shopping Ctr., LLC v. Estate of Kirsch, 777 F.3d 678, 681 (4th Cir.

        2015) (cleaned up). “Summary judgment is appropriate only when ‘the movant shows that

        there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment

        as a matter of law.’” Chapman v. Oakland Living Ctr., Inc., 48 F.4th 222, 228 (4th Cir.

        2022) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a)).

               Under the governing law of the District of Columbia, a plaintiff’s contributory

        negligence acts as a complete defense to the defendant’s liability. Dennis v. Jones, 928

        A.2d 672, 676 (D.C. 2007).        The burden is on the defendant to “establish, by a

        preponderance of the evidence, that the plaintiff failed to exercise reasonable care,” Poyner

        v. Loftus, 694 A.2d 69, 71 (D.C. 1997), by acting “with the prudence of an ordinary

        reasonable person under the circumstances,” Queen v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.,

        842 F.2d 476, 479 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (applying District of Columbia law). Here, the district

                                                     2
USCA4 Appeal: 21-2034      Doc: 22         Filed: 06/22/2023      Pg: 3 of 3

        court found that the evidentiary record compelled the conclusion that Al-Taie failed to

        exercise reasonable care under this objective standard.

               We have reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs and agree with the district court.

        Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral argument

        because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this

        court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                        AFFIRMED

                                                     3