Bullard v. Marriott Int'l Inc.

After she tripped and fell on a hotel walkway, Lanelda Bullard sued Marriott International Inc. and several other alleged designers, owners, and operators of the hotel collectively, “Marriott” for personal injuries. The trial court granted summary judgment to Marriott, and Bullard appeals. For reasons that follow, we reverse. Summary judgment is appropriate when no genuine issues of material fact remain and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.1 We review the grant of summary judgment de novo, construing the evidence and all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party.2

So viewed, the evidence shows that from 1998 to 2005, Bullard lived at the TownePlace Suites by Marriott with her husband, who was a member of the hotel’s live-in staff. On November 10, 2002, Bullard left the hotel building via a brick walkway. The pathway led to various hotel entrances, as well as the pool, and she typically used it to enter and exit the hotel. That day, however, she left through a door she did not generally use, and she walked down a portion of the brick path that was not familiar to her. Although she saw no problems or hazards in the area as she walked, she stumbled over a raised brick and fell to the ground, injuring her arm.