Mississippi Premises Liability: Enjoying a night on the lake and while at anchor, boaters were injured when struck by a second speeding boat. However, the property owner's association (POA) that owned the lake had no liability for injuries caused by third-parties, since the POA had no reason to anticipate the accident. Dedeaux v. Lake Caroline Owners Association, Inc. (Court of Civil Appeals of Mississippi; No. 2013-CA-00671-COA; September 9, 2014). The Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the POA that owned the lake. They had no reason to anticipate the accident.
•Duty to invitees to keep premises reasonably safe, and to warn of hidden dangers.
•Duty to protect invitees from injuries at the hand of others that are reasonably foreseeable.
•Key question 1: Whether the POA had actual or constructive knowledge that the speeding boat driver had been negligently operating his boat on the lake?
•Key question 2: Whether the POA had actual or constructive knowledge of a general history of negligent boating on the lake?
The court considered the case as if the plaintiffs were the POA’s business invitees. As is typical, the court reminded us that the landowner owes to the invitee a duty to keep the premises reasonably safe and to warn of hidden dangers. While these cases traditionally involve a landowner keeping the physical premises reasonably safe (i.e., the grocery store slip and fall case), in the 1980’s the Mississippi Supreme Court began expanding the duty to include negligent or wrongful attacks on the invitee by other patrons. Now, the landowner has a duty to protect invitees from injuries at the hand of others – if reasonably foreseeable. The question is whether there is reason to anticipate the wrongful or negligent act of the third party.
Here, for the case to survive, the POA had to have actual or constructive knowledge that the speeding boater had been negligently operating his boat on the lake. Or, the plaintiffs could have proved that the POA had actual or constructive knowledge of a general history of negligent boating on the lake. If the POA had cause to anticipate the accident, then a duty would exist.
The plaintiffs attempted proof through general, prior history on the lake; and failed. One boat wreck six years prior was insufficient. Nor did Owen’s boating history suffice. The plaintiff’s affidavit concerning other fast moving boats on the lake did not help either. The affidavit lacked information concerning numbers, times frames and whether other boats were in danger. Considering 700 registered boats at the lake, one boat wreck six years prior was insufficient to find that the POA should have anticipated the boat accident. As such, the POA owed no duty to the injured boaters. Therefore, summary judgment in favor of the POA was proper. For a copy of the decision, see:
http://courts.ms.gov/Images/Opinions/CO96199.pdf
Danny Collier practices in Alabama and Mississippi, and can be reached at dcollier@lchclaw.com. See Luther, Collier, Hodges & Cash, LLP’s website at www.lchclaw.com.