Shamery Blair and Titus Blair v. West Town Mall

Summary

The Tennessee Supreme Court held that constructive notice of a dangerous condition in a premises-liability case may be established through a pattern of conduct, recurring incident, or general or continuing condition indicating the condition's existence. The court rejected the separate method-of-operation analysis articulated in earlier Court of Appeals decisions and held that West Town Mall's summary-judgment materials did not affirmatively negate notice. The court affirmed and modified the Court of Appeals' judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. A plaintiff in a Tennessee premises-liability case may establish constructive notice of a dangerous condition by showing a pattern of conduct, a recurring incident, or a general or continuing condition indicating that the dangerous condition existed.
2. The method-of-operation formulation articulated in Hale v. Blue Boar Cafeteria Co. and applied in Trebing v. Fleming Cos. is rejected because it duplicates negligence elements and does not provide a useful means of determining whether the owner created or had notice of the dangerous condition.
3. A summary-judgment movant must affirmatively negate an essential element of the nonmoving party's claim or conclusively establish an affirmative defense before the nonmoving party's burden to produce evidence of a genuine issue of material fact is triggered.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Tennessee recognizes a theory permitting a premises-liability plaintiff to establish constructive notice through a pattern of conduct, recurring incident, or general or continuing condition indicating the existence of a dangerous condition.
2. Whether the plaintiff could pursue that constructive-notice theory at trial in this case.
3. Whether the mall's summary-judgment materials affirmatively negated the notice element of Blair's premises-liability claim and thereby shifted the burden to Blair to produce evidence of a genuine issue of material fact.
4. Whether the trial court improperly granted summary judgment for West Town Mall.

Disposition

affirmed