Walker v. Bruhn

David Walker appeals from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Chuck Bruhn d/b/a Best Pawn Bruhn’s on Walker’s personal injury claim. Walker sued Bruhn after being injured by a circular saw that was for sale at Bruhn’s pawn shop. Bruhn moved for summary judgment on Walker’s claims, contending that Walker could not show that Bruhn had any knowledge that the saw was defective. We agree and affirm. Summary judgment is appropriate when the court, viewing all the facts and evidence and reasonable inferences from those facts in a light most favorable to the non-movant, concludes that the evidence does not create a triable issue as to each essential element of the case. Lau’s Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491 405 SE2d 474 1991. On appeal from a grant of a motion for summary judgment, we review the evidence de novo to determine whether a genuine issue of fact remains and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Burdick v. GEICO , 277 Ga. App. 391 626 SE2d 587 2006.

The evidence below was that on the day of the accident, Walker was “hanging out” at Bruhn’s pawn shop because Tony Neal, his fiancee’s brother, worked there. Walker said that Neal was busy with another customer when someone came in and asked to see the circular saw on display. Walker got the saw and handed it to the customer. The customer then asked to have the saw plugged in to make sure it worked. Walker bent down and plugged the cord into the socket. The saw immediately started running. Before Walker could get out of the way, the saw cut into his arm and seriously injured him.