Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Premises Liability topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Judge grants summary judgment for defendants in slip‑and‑fall case

Clayton County State Court, Courtroom 304 · July 2, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Judge Tammy Long Hayward granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment in Mustite Johnson v. Sean Coyle and Bridge Street Properties, finding the plaintiff's response lacked evidentiary support and that defendants had no notice of a hazardous condition, according to defense counsel and the court's oral ruling.

Judge Tammy Long Hayward granted the defense motion for summary judgment in Mustite Johnson v. Sean Coyle and Bridge Street Properties, a premises‑liability case stemming from a June 27, 2022 fall during an apartment tour at Gardens at Park West. Defense counsel Heath Foster told the court the undisputed record showed the plaintiff had successfully traversed the same gravel path earlier that visit and presented no evidence that the defendants had actual or constructive knowledge of any hazard. Foster said defendants had received no prior complaints and there was no evidence of a dangerous condition that would put them on notice.

Plaintiff's counsel argued that constructive knowledge can be shown if an employee was present and directed the visitor through a hazardous route, and emphasized that prior traversal does not always defeat a claim if the plaintiff had not negotiated the specific hazard alleged. The parties debated the prior‑traversal doctrine and whether the relevant inquiry is the gravel walkway generally or a specific stone that caused the trip.

Judge Hayward said she would issue a written order. In court the defense urged that the plaintiff had not timely or substantively opposed the motion and that the filings presented no evidence creating a genuine dispute of material fact. The court accepted the defense position as to the legal standard and took the matter for a written ruling.

Why it matters: The court's oral ruling disposes of the case at summary judgment unless the written order states otherwise; the ruling underscores the importance of documentary evidence and timely, fact‑based responses to dispositive motions.

What happens next: The judge said parties would receive a written order formalizing the ruling and the case will proceed only if that order leaves any issue outstanding.