Automatic pistol gun on glass table in bedroom in luxury hotel in silhouette with reflection of window light.

'I'm Having Trouble Seeing That': Panel Eyes Combat Doctrine in Premises Liability Case

"The mutual combat doctrine arose back in the mid-1990s. And since that period of time, there have been maybe seven or eight cases that have worked their way through the appellate courts," the plaintiff-appellants argued. "All those cases have one thing in common. The combatants … had absolutely no connection whatsoever with the establishment."

May 29, 2024 at 03:06 PM

5 minute read

Civil Appeals

By Alex Anteau

The original version of this story was published on Daily Report

What You Need to Know

A plaintiff shot by restaurant security appealed a premises liability action where the landlord was dismissed according to mutual combat doctrine.
The defendant-appellees argue the dismissal was correct because, once the plaintiff punched the security guard, he lost his ability to seek a premises liability claim.
Now on appeal, the plaintiffs argue that mutual combat doctrine doesn't apply because the security guard had ties to the landlord.

The Georgia Court of Appeals has been asked to determine whether a premises liability case can be dismissed on the issue of mutual combat doctrine if one of the combatants had a connection with the establishment in a case where an Atlanta restaurant security guard shot a customer.

NOT FOR REPRINT