Gold Dots of Dark Background
AAJ Holiday Schedule:

Please note that AAJ's office will be closed starting on December 24th through January 2, 2025.  Happy Holidays!

Professional Negligence Law Reporter

Real Estate

You must be a Professional Negligence Law Reporter subscriber to access this content.

If you are a member of AAJ's Professional Negligence Section or a subscriber, log in below. Not yet a Section member? Join today!

Join the Professional Negligence Section

Broker, agents were not occupiers of land who owed duty to person touring home

November/December 2024

A Georgia appellate court held that real estate agents and a brokerage company were not liable to the estate of a woman who suffered fatal injuries while touring a home listed for sale.

Anna Kidd, 73, and her family members visited a home that was listed for sale. While checking out a garage space by herself, Kidd fell and hit her head. She suffered a brain bleed and died of her injuries less than two weeks later.

Her estate filed suit against Metro Brokers, Inc., and both the buyer and seller’s listing agents, alleging negligence. The trial court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment.

Affirming, the appellate court rejected the argument that the defendants were liable under Ga. Code Ann. §51-3-1, which provides that a person who owns or occupies land and invites or leads others to come on the premises for any lawful purpose is liable for injuries resulting from the failure to exercise ordinary care in keeping the premises safe. The listing agreement at issue did not delegate to Metro Brokers or to any real estate agent a duty to maintain or repair the property, the court said, noting that the property owner bore such duties. Moreover, the court found, neither Metro Brokers nor the agents were given control over the premises such that they could be considered occupiers who owed a duty under the statute.

The court nevertheless noted that real estate brokers and agents may, in some circumstances, be considered occupiers of land and be held liable for an injury. Here, however, the plaintiff had not established that the defendants owed a duty of care under the facts of this case.

Therefore, summary judgment was proper.

Citation: Kidd v. Metro Brokers, Inc., 2024 WL 3714010 (Ga. Ct. App. Aug. 8, 2024).