October 9, 2025. Partner Joseph Kaiser won Summary Judgment for his client in a case arising out of an incident that occurred in Macon State Prison in Oglethorpe, Georgia. This incident giving rise to the lawsuit occurred on May 23, 2022. The Plaintiff was a security guard working at the prison. Mr. Kaiser’s client was a contractor who had been hired to do electrical work at the prison. Two of Mr. Kaiser’s client’s employees were at the prison doing electrical work, and Plaintiff was escorting them in accordance with prison rules. As the Defendant’s employees were working above an awning on a ladder, it began to rain and Plaintiff stood underneath the awning and ladder in order to stay out of the rain. The awning collapsed, partially landing on Plaintiff. Plaintiff alleged he suffered injuries resulting from the incident and filed suit.
When questioned at deposition whether he could say what specifically the Defendant’s worker did to cause the awning to fall, however, Plaintiff testified as follows: “I assume probably his- his weight or something. I don’t know. I don’t know what caused it. I — I don’t know what caused it.” Likewise, when asked whether the DPS employee fell onto the awning, Plaintiff responded, “Not that I know. I don’t know. I didn’t see him.” Finally, when asked whether he knew what, if anything, the DPS worker did that caused the awning to fall, Plaintiff — consistently — said, “No sir.”
Following the Deposition, Mr. Kaiser moved for Summary Judgment. In the response to the Motion for Summary Judgment, Plaintiff provided an affidavit with testimony which differed from his deposition. Mr. Kaiser contended and the Court agreed that such contradictions are not allowed in Georgia under Prophecy Corp. v. Charles Rossignol, Inc., 256 Ga. 27 (1986). Plaintiff also alleged the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitor applied, however, the Court found that “the Court is not convinced by Plaintiff’s argument that this case is governed by the doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitor. First, Plaintiff did not point to evidence to establish that a falling awning is a type of occurrence that does not occur in the absence of someone’s negligence. Plaintiff did not show that no structural defect, either visible or undetectable by the naked eye, caused the awning to fall. Second, Plaintiff did not point to any evidence on file to show that the awning was under Defendant’s exclusive control. Rather, the evidence indicates that Defendant’s employees were responsible for electrical work on or around the awning which was located on the premises of Macon State Prison.”
The Court granted Mr. Kaiser’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
The case is Thomas Smith v. DPS Group, LLC, State Court of Gwinnett County, CAFN 24-C-04039-S2
Read more about Attorney Joseph Kaiser here.
Read more about GMKE at http://www.gmke.law.
