Arizona Court of Appeals, Div II Case No. 2 CA-CV 2023-0205 Filed January 22, 2025
Westerman v. Ernst and Schneider
Key Legal Issues:
- Whether Rachelle Westerman’s status changed from invitee to trespasser when she stepped off the concrete walkway onto the gravel area.
- Whether the change in elevation between the walkway and gravel area was an open and obvious condition, thus not unreasonably dangerous.
Resulting Opinion of Key Legal Issues:
- The court concluded that there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether Rachelle’s status changed from invitee to trespasser. The court disagreed with the superior court’s determination that no reasonable person could have thought the gravel area was a designated walkway.
- The court found that a genuine factual dispute exists concerning whether the elevation change was open and obvious and not unreasonably dangerous.
Synopsis:
This premises liability case involves Rachelle Westerman, who suffered injuries after falling in a gravel area at a shopping center. The Arizona Court of Appeals emphasized that the scope of a person’s invitation extends to areas that a reasonable person would believe are open to them. The court found that there were genuine issues of material fact regarding both Rachelle’s status and whether the condition was unreasonably dangerous.
The case highlights important legal principles in premises liability, including:
- The distinction between invitees and trespassers and how it affects a landowner’s duty of care.
- The concept of “open and obvious” conditions and their relation to unreasonably dangerous conditions.
- The importance of factual determinations in premises liability cases.
Outcome of the Case:
The Arizona Court of Appeals vacated the superior court’s order granting summary judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with their decision.