Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY

STATE OF GEORGIA

FANNIE GERVIN and *


BOBBY L. GERVIN, *
Plaintiffs, * CIVIL ACTION
* FILE NO.:
Vs. *
*
LENOX SQUARE MALL MANAGEMENT, *
SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, L.P. and *
JOHN DOE, *
Defendants. *

COMPLAINT
COME NOW, Fanniey Gervin and Bobby Gervin, (henceforth Plaintiffs), in the above-
captioned case, and herewith files this Complaint for injuries against Lenox Square Mall
Management, Simon Property Group, L.P. and John Doe, (henceforth Defendants), and
respectfully shows as follows:
Parties and Jurisdiction
1.
Simon Property Group, L.P. is a foreign limited Partnership, with place of doing business at
225 W. Washington Street, Indianapolis, IN. 46204, and may be served with the herein complaint
and process by serving its registered agent, Corporation Process Company at 2180 Satellite
Boulevard, Suite 400, Duluth, Georgia 30097, in Gwinnett County.
2.
Lenox Square Mall Management appears to be an entity doing business in the State of
Georgia, and may have its principal place of doing business at office address at 3393 Peachtree Rd
NE, Atlanta, GA 30326, and a service of herein complaint and process upon an officer of the entity
with the requisite authority shall perfect service.
3.
Upon information and belief, Defendant, John Doe, may be persons and/or entities who are
principals, agents, partners, or affiliated entities with the Defendants, Simon Property Group, L.P.

Page | 1
and Lenox Square Mall Management, and/or who are legally responsible for the actions of
Defendants delineated in the subsequent paragraphs herein, and whose identities are unknown to
the Plaintiffs as of the date hereof. With respect to these unknown Defendant, the Plaintiffs shall, if
and when the true and correct identities of such persons and/or entities are ascertained, substitute
the true and correct names and serve them according to law.
4.
Defendants own and operate the shopping mall known as Lenox Square Mall in Atlanta,
Georgia, and may be jointly or separately responsible for the maintenance of the facilities.
5.
On or around May 2, 2015, Plaintiff, a customer, slammed her head against the revolving
door at the entrance to the mall, sustained multiple injuries including impairment to her denture, as
such, the underlying action is for negligence and premises liability against Defendants.
6.
This Court has personal and subject matter jurisdiction over these controversies, the
Defendants, and venue will be appropriate.
Facts
7.
Plaintiff incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 6 of his Complaint as if fully set
forth herein.
8.
On May 2, 2015, Plaintiffs shopped at the Lenox Square Mall, and as such, an invited guest of
Defendants.
9.
Plaintiff, Fannie Gervin, utilized the revolving door at the entrance to the mall, which was
automated and without a posted signage, malfunctioned.
10.
Plaintiff, Fannie Gervin, slammed her head against the plain glass wing on the automated
revolving door, and she sustained injuries to her mouth and teeth necessitating extensive and ongoing
dental treatment and restoration.

Page | 2
11.
Defendants owed a duty to business invitees such as Plaintiff to keep the premises in a safe
condition.
12.
Prior to the subject incident, Defendants were aware or should have been of the defects with
the automatic revolving door, and that it constituted a potential danger to its customers.
13.
Defendants were negligent in allowing Plaintiff and others to pass through the door and failing
to take adequate measures to protect invitees from the hazards presented by the unsafe door.
14.
Plaintiff neither assumed the risk of his accident nor shared in the negligence of Defendants.
15.
Defendants are separately and jointly liable for the damages sustained by this Plaintiff,
including all past and future medical cost, and the loss of bodily function due to Plaintiffs injuries.
16.
Plaintiff received treatment from employees and members of the City of Atlanta Paramedics,
and at a cost that shall be presented at the trial of this matter.
17.
Plaintiff received treatment from doctors at Kaiser Permanente Hospital, and received
medical bills of one thousand two hundred seventy-six dollars, ($1276.00), and/or as may be proved
at trial.
18.
Plaintiff received treatment from Spalding Gentle Dentistry, and received a medical bill of
seven thousand two hundred fifty-six dollars, ($7256.00).
19.
Plaintiff received treatment from Parkway Periodontics Newnan, GA., and received a medical
bill of seven hundred twenty-one dollars, ($721.00).
20.
Plaintiff received treatment from Dr. Brown, and received a medical bill of two hundred
twenty-five dollars, ($225.00).

Page | 3
21.
Plaintiff received treatment from Dr. Brunson, and received a medical bill of two thousand
one hundred eighty-five dollars, ($2185.00).
22.
Plaintiff received treatment from Dr. Finkel, and received a medical bill of eighty-nine
dollars, ($89.00).
23.
Plaintiff received treatment from Dr. McCool, and received a medical bill of eighty-five
dollars, ($85.00).
24.
Plaintiff received treatment from Dr. Stanley Rye, and received a medical bill of ten thousand
three hundred twenty dollars, ($10,320.00).
25.
Plaintiff received treatment from Atlanta Oral & Facial Surgery, and received a medical bill of
forty-five dollars, ($45.00).
26.
Plaintiff received treatment from Atlanta ENT Sinus & Allergy, and received a medical bill of
four hundred dollars, ($400.00).
27.
Plaintiff have consulted and received treatments from other medical facilities, and the
medical notes and bills from each of these facilities shall be provided.
Count One Premises Liability
28.
Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 27 of herein Complaint as if fully
restated.
29.
Plaintiff was an invitee on Defendants premises.
30.
Prior to the subject incident, Defendants were aware or should have been aware of the defects
with the automatic revolving door at the main entrance to Lenox square Mall and needed repairs.

Page | 4
31.
Defendants were negligent in allowing Plaintiff and others to pass through the unsafe
automatic revolving door and failing to take adequate measures to protect invitees from the hazards
presented by the door.
32.
Defendants were negligent in failing to keep the premises safe for invitees such as Plaintiff.
33.
Defendants knew or should have known that their duty to maintain the defective door was
non-delegable, however, Defendants breached the herein enumerated duty.
34.
Defendants breach is the actual and proximate cause of Plaintiffs injury, and are entitled to
compensation from Defendants.
Count TwoNegligence
35.
Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 34 of herein Complaint as if fully
stated.
36.
Defendants assumed the duty to maintain the premises that was opened to serve Plaintiff
against damages such danger that caused the injuries to Plaintiff.
37.
Defendants knew or should have known that the defects and damages to its automatic
revolving door constituted a potential hazard.
38.
Plaintiff sustained injuries and incurred damages as a result of Defendants failure to
maintain the defects and damages to the automatic revolving door.
Count ThreeVicarious Liability
39.
Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 38 of herein Complaint as if fully
stated.

Page | 5
40.
At all times relevant to this action, Defendants retained or hired the services of individuals
responsible for inspecting and maintaining the automatic revolving door where Plaintiff was injured,
and such individuals were acting within the scope of their employment.
41.
Defendants are responsible for the actions of these individuals pursuant to the doctrine of
respondeat superior, agency, apparent agency or negligent retention.
42.
Defendants breached the herein duty.
43.
Plaintiff sustained injuries and incurred damages as a result of Defendants failure breach of
the herein duty.
Count FourLoss of Consortium
44.

Plaintiff, Fannie Garvin, incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 43 of her Complaint


as if fully stated.
45.

Plaintiff, Fannie Garvin, is married to Bobby L. Garvin.

46.

Mr. Garvin cared for Plaintiff at all times during her recuperation. He performed all the
chores that Plaintiff regularly performs at home and was denied the comfort of his spouse.

47.

Mr. Garvin was unable to be intimate, share significant times and enjoy the society,
companionship and consortium of his wife during the period of her convalescence due to the
negligence and reckless conduct of Defendants.

48.

Defendants conduct, and as shown inter alia, was the direct and proximate cause of the
injuries to Mr. Garvin and such has caused him great suffering, loneliness and grief.

Page | 6
49.

Mr. Garvin request to be compensated appropriately for his services, deprivations and other
losses he endured as a result of the injury, pain and suffering that his wife endured from the
negligence of Defendants.

Count FiveAttorneys Fees


50.
Plaintiffs incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 49 of herein Complaint as if fully
stated.
52.
The conduct of Defendants to adequately and reasonably assist and evaluate Plaintiffs
injury, and others are in bad faith, caused this Plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expenses, thus, this
Plaintiff demands Attorneys fees in pursuant to O.C.G.A. 51-12-7.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands:
(i) that summons and process issued, and served upon each of the herein Defendants as
provided by law;
(ii) that Plaintiffs have judgment in an amount to be determined at trial for all his past,
present and future losses;
(iii) that Plaintiffs have other judgments he is entitled to under the laws;
(iv) that Plaintiffs have judgment against Defendants for his medical care at Kaiser
Permanente and at a cost of $1276.00;
(v) that Plaintiff have judgment against Defendants for the services rendered at Spalding
Gentle Dentistry and in the amount of $7256.00;
(vi) that Plaintiff have judgment against Defendants for the services rendered by Parkway
Periodontics Newnan, GA in the amount of $721.00;
(vii) that Plaintiffs have judgment against Defendants for his medical care from Dr. Brown
and at a cost of $225.00;
(viii) that Plaintiffs have judgment against Defendants for his medical care from Dr.
Brunson and at a cost of $2185.00;
(ix) that Plaintiffs have judgment against Defendants for his medical care from Dr. Finkel
and at a cost of $89.00;
(x) that Plaintiffs have judgment against Defendants for his medical care from Dr.
McCool and at a cost of $85.00;
(xi) that Plaintiffs have judgment against Defendants for his medical care from Dr.
Stanley Rye and at a cost of $10,320.00;
(xii) that Plaintiffs have judgment against Defendants for his medical care from Atlanta
Oral & Facial Surgery and at a cost of $45.00;

Page | 7
(xiii) that Plaintiffs have judgment against Defendants for his medical care from Atlanta
ENT Sinus & Allergy and at a cost of $400.00;
(xiv) Plaintiff have judgment in an amount to be determined at trial for all his past,
present and future pain and suffering;
(xv) that Plaintiff recovers all attorneys fees;
(xvi) that Plaintiff receives all damages pursuant to O.C.G.A. 51-12-7; and
(xvii). that the cost of the action be cast upon Defendants.

Respectfully submitted,

___s/ Yinka Omole_________


Yinka T. Omole, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
Post Office Box 18339 Georgia Bar #: 553795
Atlanta, Georgia 30316
PH (404)624-3011
FX (404)624-3012
ylawfirm@gmail.com

Page | 8