August 5, 2026—GMKE Partner Joseph A. Kaiser and associate Attorney Greg Mercer obtained summary judgment in favor of the defendants in the State Court of Cobb County before Judge Carl W. Bowers, defeating a premises liability slip-and-fall claim after establishing that the defendants lacked superior knowledge of the alleged hazard and that the plaintiff had, at a minimum, equal knowledge of the condition that caused her fall.
This suit arose out of a slip-and-fall that occurred on November 23, 2019, at a restaurant located at 1370 Joe Frank Harris Parkway SE in Cartersville, Georgia, which was owned and operated by Mr. Kaiser’s client. On the morning of the incident, it was raining hard, and a wet-floor sign and floor mats greeted patrons at the entrance. The plaintiff entered the store and went to the restroom. Upon entering the restroom, she went to the handicap stall where she observed “some water” beneath the stall door. The plaintiff testified that she walked over that water, used the toilet, and afterward noticed that the bottoms of her pant legs were wet. Without looking around or down to check the floor, she stood up, took two steps, slipped, and fell inside the stall.
After written discovery and depositions, attorneys Kaiser and Mercer moved for summary judgment on behalf of the defendants. Under Georgia’s premises liability framework, an invitee must establish that the owner had superior knowledge of the hazard—that is, actual or constructive knowledge of a condition that the plaintiff, in the exercise of ordinary care, lacked. GMKE demonstrated that the defendants maintained and implemented a reasonable inspection program, including a supervised deep cleaning of the restroom before the shift and hourly travel-path inspections throughout the day, negating any inference of constructive knowledge. GMKE further established that the plaintiff observed water at the stall door before proceeding, failed to look for water before stepping, and fell only after successfully negotiating the condition—demonstrating knowledge of the hazard equal to or greater than that of the defendants.
In opposition, the plaintiff argued that the water she observed at the stall door was in a different location than the water on which she fell and raised a spoliation claim based on the defendants’ failure to produce an inspection checklist. The Court rejected these arguments finding that the defendants lacked superior knowledge of the water and that the plaintiff had, at a minimum, equal knowledge of it. The Court further found that the plaintiff failed to exercise ordinary care for her own safety under the totality of the circumstances and held that the defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The Court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment in full.
The case is Alexis Griffiths v. 67BB Vette, LLC, et al., State Court of Cobb County, CAFN: 23-A-5092-7.
Click on the link to read more about attorney Joseph Kaiser.
Click on the link to read more about associate Gregory Mercer here.
Read more about GMKE at http://www.gmke.law. Follow GMKE on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram.
