Phoenix Associates, John Sticht and Kyle Broadfoot, obtained summary judgment
in favor of a hospitality industry client in a premises liability case.
The plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit alleged he suffered significant injuries after a slip and fall while attempting to get into a shower at the client’s hotel. The plaintiff alleged that a shower grab bar, which broke away, was improperly attached to the shower wall and that the hotel owner was negligent because it should have known of the admittedly concealed and latent defect.
In the motion for summary judgment, the defense successfully argued that it was not reasonably foreseeable to know of a prior dangerous and alleged hazardous condition, as required by Restatement (Second) of Torts § 343 and Flowers v. K-Mart Corp., 126 Ariz. 495, 498, 616 P.2d 955, 958 (App. 1980). The defense presented maintenance and repair records and staff testimony indicating there had been no prior similar incidents and the hotel maintenance and housekeeping staff routinely inspected and used the shower grab bars in the day-to-day operation, none of which revealed the particular defectively installed grab bar. Meanwhile, the plaintiff attempted to rebut the evidence with expert opinions that the defect still should have been discovered. Mr. Sticht successfully argued that despite these expert opinions, there was no competent evidence that the hotel knew, had reason to know, or should have known of the concealed latent defect that existed since original construction more than 16 years before. The Court agreed and ruled that the hotel owner was entitled to summary judgment in its favor on all of the plaintiff’s causes of action.
