Georgia S. and Fla. Ry. Co. v. Peters

No evidence showed that the railway should have reasonably foreseen that its employee might be the victim of a random criminal assault at a convenience store owned by a third party, which was not on the railway's property or right-of-way.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In this granted interlocutory appeal, Georgia Southern and Florida Railway Company “the railroad” appeals from the order of the Bibb County Superior Court denying its motion for summary judgment in a personal injury action brought by one of its employees, Wayne Peters, under the Federal Employer’s Liability Act “FELA”.1 Peters sued the railroad after a robber hit him in the head with a baseball bat when Peters entered a convenience store during working hours. The railroad contends that the trial court applied an incorrect standard of care and that it was entitled to summary judgment because the criminal assault of Peters on a third party’s property was not reasonably foreseeable. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the superior court’s order and enter judgment in favor of the railroad. “On appeal from the grant of summary judgment the appellate court conducts a de novo review of the evidence to determine whether there is a genuine issue of material fact and whether the undisputed facts, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, warrant judgment as a matter of law.” Citation and punctuation omitted. Munroe v. Universal Health Svcs. , 277 Ga. 861, 864-865 2 596 SE2d 604 2004.

Viewed in the light most favorable to Peters, the record contains evidence of the following facts. On November 10, 2000, Peters was hit on the head with a baseball bat when he entered Bennett’s Grocery during a robbery. Bennett’s was a convenience store located 25 to 50 yards from train tracks used by the railroad in Adel Georgia. It is undisputed that Bennett’s was not located on the railroad’s property or right-of-way.

Georgia S. and Fla. Ry. Co. v. Peters

No evidence showed that the railway should have reasonably foreseen that its employee might be the victim of a random criminal assault at a convenience store owned by a third party, which was not on the railway's property or right-of-way.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report