Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani Partner Hiawatha Northington II recently obtained summary judgment and dismissal on behalf of the firm’s client in a wrongful death premises liability claim.
The case arose out of a stabbing incident at an apartment complex, which was owned and operated by GRSM’s client. The victim had allegedly been stabbed by a tenant of the apartment complex while on the premises, though there was a dispute between the parties as to whether he was an invitee, licensee, or trespasser at the time of the incident. Nonetheless, the victim was charged with trespassing by local law enforcement, and he ultimately passed away.
The personal representative of the decedent filed suit against numerous parties, including GRSM’s client, the owner and operator of the apartment complex. The plaintiff claimed that the apartment complex failed to maintain the premises in a safe condition because it allegedly failed to prevent the stabbing incident from taking place, either by failing to provide adequate security or by failing to properly check the background of the tenant for a propensity toward criminal behavior.
Before any depositions were taken, GRSM acted swiftly and filed a motion for summary judgment, noting that because the plaintiff’s claim was essentially a premises liability claim of an invitee arising out of a criminal act, the Mississippi Landowners Protection Act applied. Since the plaintiff did not satisfy the essential requirements of the Act, which included proving that the apartment complex “impelled” the criminal act, the plaintiff’s claim could not survive summary judgment.
The district court not only agreed with GRSM’s argument but also further examined the plaintiff’s claim under traditional analysis of duties owed to trespassers and licensees, concluding that the apartment complex did not willfully or wantonly act to injure the decedent. Accordingly, no matter the classification of the decedent, the trial court found that the plaintiff failed to create a genuine issue of material fact and determined that summary judgment was indeed appropriate.
GRSM’s early engagement in motion practice in this case secured a favorable outcome for its client, consistent with both the Landowners Protection Act and Mississippi common law governing premises liability cases.