The Landings Ass'n, Inc. v. Williams - 318 Ga. App. 760, 736 S.E.2d 140 (2012)

Rule:

Under Georgia law, the doctrine of animals ferae naturae does not operate as an exception to Georgia's general principles regarding a landowner's duty to exercise ordinary care in keeping its premises safe such as would confer a blanket immunity from liability for any harm caused by a free wild animal on the owner's land.

Facts:

Appellees WILLIAMS et al., the estate and heirs of Gwyneth Williams sought to recover damages from the owners of a lagoon where Williams was allegedly killed by a large alligator. The state court denied in part the motion for summary judgment filed by the joint owners of the lagoon- appellants The Landings Association, Inc. In an earlier appeal, the court concluded that a question of fact remains as to whether the owners failed, pursuant to the law of premises liability, to take reasonable steps to protect Williams from being attacked and killed by an alligator on their premises. The supreme court found that the record shows that Williams had equal knowledge of the threat of alligators within the community and, therefore, that the owners are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the appellees' premises liability claims and reversed. Accordingly, the earlier decision was vacated, and the judgment of the Supreme Court is made the judgment of this Court.

Issue:

Did the appellant owners failed, pursuant to the law of premises liability, to take reasonable steps to protect decedent from being attacked and killed by an alligator on their premises?

Answer:

No.

Conclusion:

The court considered the appellant owner’s argument that, under the common law doctrine of animals ferae naturae, a landowner is not responsible as a matter of law for any harm caused by a free wild animal on the owner's land. The court held that under Georgia law, the doctrine of animals ferae naturae does not operate as an exception to Georgia's general principles regarding a landowner's duty to exercise ordinary care in keeping its premises safe such as would confer a blanket immunity from liability for any harm caused by a free wild animal on the owner's land. Where there is evidence from which a jury could find that the defendant should have anticipated the presence of the wild animal and that it was reasonably foreseeable that its presence would render the premises unsafe for visitors, the defendant will not be entitled to judgment as a matter of law purely on the basis of the doctrine of animals ferae naturae.