Hammerstein v. Jean Development West
Nevada Supreme Court
907 P.2d 975 (1995)
- Written by Angela Patrick, JD
Facts
On New Year’s Eve, George Hammerstein (plaintiff) and his wife, Venita, stayed at a hotel owned by Jean Development West (defendant). Hammerstein was approximately 70 years old and diabetic. At check-in, Hammerstein informed the clerk that his health meant he should not use stairs and asked for a first-floor room. However, no first-floor rooms were available. Hammerstein agreed to stay in a fourth-floor room, which was accessible using an elevator. At approximately 1:30 a.m., the hotel’s fire alarm sounded. The fire alarm disabled the elevator, and no hotel staff were present. Hammerstein walked down the hotel’s metal stairs to evacuate the building. While walking, Hammerstein slipped on a stair and twisted his ankle. The hotel staff determined that there was no danger, and Hammerstein used the elevator to return to his room. At that time, Hammerstein noticed bruising on his ankle and a blister on his heel. Hammerstein did not seek medical attention for his foot until a week later. By then, the blister had ulcerated and turned gangrenous, creating a serious injury. Hammerstein sued the hotel under multiple theories, including standard negligence. Hammerstein presented evidence that for months the hotel’s fire alarm system had sounded unusually often, possibly due to malfunctions or pranksters. Hammerstein argued that the hotel’s many false alarms made frequent emergency evacuations likely, thereby imposing a duty on the hotel to take special precautions to ensure guest safety during evacuations. The trial court granted the hotel’s motion for summary judgment. Hammerstein appealed to the Nevada Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 790,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.