Matlack v. Cobb Elec. Membership Corp.

Vicki Matlack, as the parent and natural guardian of Eric Matlack, filed suit against Cobb Electric Membership Corporation “Cobb Electric”, alleging that its negligent maintenance of a “guy wire” caused injury to her son.1 Cobb Electric moved for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. In multiple enumerations of error, Matlack challenges this ruling. Finding no error, we affirm. We review the trial court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, and we view the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party.2 A trial court properly grants summary judgment when there exists no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party establishes entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.3 A defendant demonstrates entitlement to summary judgment by showing that there is no evidence to support at least one essential element of the plaintiff’s case.4

Viewed in this manner, the record reveals that on December 30, 2003, 16-year-old Eric Matlack was visiting a friend’s house when he decided to ride a motorized dirt bike.5 Eric rode the dirt bike down the driveway and turned left onto a “pathway” on the shoulder of the road.6 The pathway was on private property, upon which Cobb Electric had an easement. After driving only a short distance, Eric struck a guy wire, or a cable, maintained by Cobb Electric that was attached to the top of a utility pole and extended to the ground. According to Eric, although he could see the pole, he could not see the guy wire. As a result of the incident, Eric injured his arm and shoulder and his leg sustained a deep cut.