Maurice Johnson v. Blue Chip Casino, LLC, d/b/a Blue Chip Casino Hotel Spa , 110 N.E.3d 375 ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                    FILED
    Aug 29 2018, 8:38 am
    CLERK
    Indiana Supreme Court
    Court of Appeals
    and Tax Court
    ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT                                     ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE
    Candace C. Williams                                        Charles C. Hoppe, Jr.
    Tolbert & Tolbert, LLC                                     Roland Clark
    Gary, Indiana                                              Knight Hoppe Kurnik &
    Knight, Ltd.
    Schererville, Indiana
    IN THE
    COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
    Maurice Johnson,                                           August 29, 2018
    Appellant-Plaintiff,                                       Court of Appeals Case No.
    18A-SC-788
    v.                                                 Appeal from the LaPorte Superior
    Court
    Blue Chip Casino, LLC, d/b/a                               The Honorable Jeffrey L. Thorne,
    Blue Chip Casino Hotel Spa,                                Judge
    Appellee-Defendant                                         Trial Court Cause No.
    46D03-1710-SC-2122
    Vaidik, Chief Judge.
    Case Summary
    [1]   While Maurice Johnson was a guest at Blue Chip Casino Hotel Spa in
    Michigan City, he woke up to discover bed-bug bites on his right arm. Johnson
    brought a small-claims action against Blue Chip Casino, LLC, and the court
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-SC-788 | August 29, 2018                               Page 1 of 9
    entered judgment in favor of Blue Chip. Johnson now appeals, arguing that the
    doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applies to this case. Because Johnson has failed to
    prove that the presence of bed bugs in his hotel room more probably resulted
    from Blue Chip’s negligence as opposed to another cause, we affirm the small-
    claims court’s judgment in favor of Blue Chip.
    Facts and Procedural History
    [2]   Johnson and his wife checked into Room 1253 at Blue Chip on January 1,
    2017. Because the room had two full beds (instead of a king bed as they had
    requested), Johnson and his wife slept in separate beds. When Johnson and his
    wife pulled down the sheets as they were going to bed, they did not see any bed
    bugs in their respective beds. But when Johnson woke up the next morning, he
    noticed bites on his arm and then saw one live bed bug on his pillow. He pulled
    down the sheets and saw two shell casings from dead bed bugs. Johnson’s wife
    took photos. Ex. 1. Johnson called guest services, and a supervisor came to
    their room, put the live bed bug in a jar, and had Johnson’s and his wife’s
    belongings “hot boxed” to kill any other bed bugs. Tr. p. 19. After checking
    out of the hotel, Johnson went to the emergency room, where he was treated for
    bed-bug bites and given an anti-itch prescription.
    [3]   In October 2017, Johnson filed a notice of claim in small-claims court in
    LaPorte County alleging that “[a]s a result of his stay, [he] received bed bug
    bites” and “incurred medical expenses and suffered emotional distress due to
    [Blue Chip’s] negligence and breach of their duty of care.” Appellant’s App.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-SC-788 | August 29, 2018        Page 2 of 9
    Vol. II p. 9. At trial, Blue Chip’s Safety Loss Prevention Manager, Rosella
    Luna, testified that because bed bugs are found in “hotels” and “a lot of other
    places,” Blue Chip has policies and procedures for inspecting and treating hotel
    rooms for them. Tr. p. 44. Luna explained that new hires undergo training on
    how to look for bed bugs and that all housekeepers and supervisors undergo
    annual training as well. Luna said that Blue Chip’s hotel rooms are cleaned
    and inspected daily (assuming they are rented out) and that the inspections
    include looking for evidence of bed bugs. Specifically, when housekeepers strip
    the beds, they look at the mattresses “to see if there is any evidence” of bed
    bugs. Id. at 42. Housekeepers also look for evidence of bed bugs in “the nooks
    and crannies” of the rooms, including furniture and bedding. Id. If a bed bug is
    found during a room inspection, that room as well as the surrounding rooms
    are taken out of service. A professional pest-control company then inspects the
    rooms and, if necessary, treats them. The treated rooms are held out of service
    until the pest-control company certifies that they’re clean and safe to rent.
    [4]   Luna also testified that about two months before Johnson’s January 2017 stay,
    on November 4, 2016, Blue Chip received a complaint about bed bugs in the
    same room, Room 1253. At that time, Terminix “inspected and treated the
    room and held [it] out of service until . . . November 11, 201[6].” Id. at 35.
    Luna testified that she did not know if that guest brought the bed bugs into the
    hotel room, because “I can’t tell you if people bring them in or not.” Id. at 43.
    From November 11, 2016, until January 2, 2017, Blue Chip did not receive any
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-SC-788 | August 29, 2018         Page 3 of 9
    other complaints about bed bugs in Room 1253 even though the room was
    rented during that time. Id. at 35.
    [5]   Following trial, the small-claims court entered findings and judgment in favor
    of Blue Chip. The court acknowledged that Johnson seemed to argue that “the
    existence of a bed bug is Res Ipsa Loquitur on the part of an inn keeper”;
    however, it found no merit to this argument. Appellant’s App. Vol. II p. 8.
    [6]   Johnson now appeals.
    Discussion and Decision
    [7]   The small-claims court determined that Johnson failed to meet his burden of
    proof regarding his claim against Blue Chip. Because the small-claims court’s
    decision was not in Johnson’s favor, he is appealing from a negative judgment.
    On appeal, we will not reverse a negative judgment unless it is contrary to
    law. LTL Truck Serv., LLC v. Safeguard, Inc., 
    817 N.E.2d 664
    , 667 (Ind. Ct. App.
    2004). To determine whether a judgment is contrary to law, we consider the
    evidence in the light most favorable to the appellee, together with all the
    reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom. 
    Id.
     A judgment will be reversed
    only if the evidence leads to but one conclusion and the trial court reached the
    opposite conclusion. 
    Id.
    [8]   Johnson argues that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applies to this case.
    Res ipsa loquitur is translated from Latin as “the thing speaks for itself.” Gary
    Cmty. Sch. Corp. v. Lardydell, 
    8 N.E.3d 241
    , 247 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014), trans.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-SC-788 | August 29, 2018            Page 4 of 9
    denied. It is a rule of evidence that permits an inference of negligence to be
    drawn based upon the surrounding facts and circumstances of the injury. Rector
    v. Oliver, 
    809 N.E.2d 887
    , 889 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), trans. denied; see also Cergnul
    v. Heritage Inn of Ind., Inc., 
    785 N.E.2d 328
    , 331 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (“[R]es
    ipsa loquitur permits an assumption that in some situations an occurrence is so
    unusual that, absent a reasonable justification or explanation, those persons in
    control of the situation should be held responsible.” (emphasis added)), reh’g
    denied, trans. denied. To create an inference of negligence, a plaintiff must
    establish that (1) the circumstances under which the injury occurred were under
    the management or exclusive control of the defendant and (2) the occurrence is
    of the type that does not ordinarily happen if those who have the management
    and control exercise proper care. Rector, 
    809 N.E.2d at 890
    . In determining
    whether the doctrine applies, the question is whether the incident more
    probably resulted from the defendant’s negligence as opposed to another cause.
    
    Id.
     A plaintiff may rely upon common sense and experience or expert
    testimony to prove that the incident more probably resulted from negligence.
    Cleary v. Manning, 
    884 N.E.2d 335
    , 338 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
    [9]   Even assuming that Blue Chip maintained exclusive control over Room 1253
    once Johnson and his wife checked in, Johnson has failed to prove that the
    presence of bed bugs in his hotel room on January 1 or 2, 2017, more probably
    resulted from Blue Chip’s negligence as opposed to another cause. Bed bugs
    are small bugs that “hide during the day in places such as seams of mattresses,
    box springs, bed frames, headboards, dresser tables, inside cracks and crevices,
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-SC-788 | August 29, 2018          Page 5 of 9
    behind wallpaper, or any other clutter or objects around a bed.” Centers for
    Disease Control & Prevention, Bed Bugs FAQs,
    https://www.cdc.gov/parasites/bedbugs/faqs.html. Because bed bugs are a
    problem for hotels, Blue Chip developed policies and procedures for inspecting
    and treating hotel rooms for them. Luna testified that housekeepers are trained
    on bed bugs and look for evidence of bed bugs each time a room is cleaned,
    including stripping the beds to look at the mattresses and looking in “the nooks
    and crannies” of the rooms.
    [10]   Johnson argues, however, that “bed bugs and bed bug shells are not usually
    found in hotel beds unless the hotel’s cleaning procedures f[a]ll below the
    reasonable standard.” Appellant’s Br. p. 11. His argument assumes that he
    would not have woken up to bed-bug bites if the housekeepers had done a better
    job cleaning and/or inspecting his room. But because of the hidden nature of
    bed bugs, it is entirely possible that a more thorough cleaning and inspection
    would not have discovered or eliminated the bed bugs. Johnson has thus failed
    to prove that the presence of bed bugs in his hotel room on January 1 or 2,
    2017, more probably resulted from Blue Chip’s negligence as opposed to
    another cause. See Cergnul, 
    785 N.E.2d at 332
     (concluding that the plaintiff
    failed to satisfy the requirements of the res ipsa loquitur doctrine: “it is
    axiomatic that stair railings can become loose and fall through no negligence on
    the part of a landowner. For instance, a screw behind the wall could have
    fractured or another guest could have vandalized the railing just before Cergnul
    used it. Moreover, the evidence showed that neither the Super 8’s manager nor
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-SC-788 | August 29, 2018             Page 6 of 9
    any of the hotel employees experienced any difficulties with the railing prior to
    Cergnul’s fall.”).
    [11]   Johnson argues that even if the res ipsa loquitur doctrine does not apply, Blue
    Chip is liable under premises liability. As a hotel guest, Johnson was an invitee
    of Blue Chip. See Holiday Hosp. Franchising, Inc. v. AMCO Ins. Co., 
    983 N.E.2d 574
    , 580 n.8 (Ind. 2013). Under Indiana premises-liability law, the owner or
    possessor of land owes the highest duty of care to its invitees: the duty to
    exercise reasonable care for their protection while they are on the premises.
    Roumbos v. Vazanellis, 
    95 N.E.3d 63
    , 66 (Ind. 2018). Indiana has adopted the
    Restatement (Second) of Torts section 343, which provides:
    A possessor of land is subject to liability for physical harm caused
    to his invitees by a condition on the land if, but only if, he
    (a) knows or by the exercise of reasonable care would
    discover the condition, and should realize that it involves
    an unreasonable risk of harm to such invitees, and
    (b) should expect that they will not discover or realize the
    danger, or will fail to protect themselves against it, and
    (c) fails to exercise reasonable care to protect them against
    the danger.
    
    Id.
     (citing Restatement § 343). An invitor is not the insurer of the invitee’s
    safety, and before liability may be imposed on the invitor, it must have actual or
    constructive knowledge of the danger. Schultz v. Kroger Co., 
    963 N.E.2d 1141
    ,
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-SC-788 | August 29, 2018               Page 7 of 9
    1144 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012). Constructive knowledge can be found when a
    condition has existed for such a length of time and under such circumstances
    that it would have been discovered in time to have prevented injury if the
    invitor had used ordinary care. 
    Id.
    [12]   Here, the small-claims court found that Johnson failed to prove that Blue Chip
    had either actual or constructive knowledge that bed bugs were present in
    Room 1253 on January 1 or January 2, 2017, Appellant’s App. Vol. II p. 8, and
    the record supports this finding. According to Luna, Blue Chip did not have
    actual knowledge that there were bed bugs in Room 1253 on January 1 or 2
    until Johnson called guest services to report them.
    [13]   Regarding whether Blue Chip had constructive knowledge, the record reflects
    that Blue Chip has policies and procedures for inspecting and treating hotel
    rooms for bed bugs. That is, Blue Chip’s hotel rooms are cleaned and inspected
    daily, which includes looking for evidence of bed bugs on mattresses and in
    “the nooks and crannies” of the rooms. If a bed bug is found during an
    inspection, that room as well as the neighboring rooms are taken out of service.
    A professional pest-control company is called to inspect and, if necessary, treat
    the rooms. The treated rooms are held out of service until the pest-control
    company certifies that they’re clean and safe to rent.
    [14]   The record also reflects that not only did Blue Chip have bed-bug policies and
    procedures in place in January 2017, but Blue Chip followed them as well.
    That is, about two months before Johnson checked into Room 1253 at Blue
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-SC-788 | August 29, 2018        Page 8 of 9
    Chip, on November 4, 2016, bed bugs were found in the same room. At that
    time, Terminix “inspected and treated the room and held [it] out of service until
    . . . November 11, 201[6].” Tr. p. 35. From November 11, 2016, until January
    2, 2017, Blue Chip did not receive any other complaints of bed bugs in Room
    1253 even though the room was rented during that time. 
    Id.
     Accordingly, the
    small-claims court did not err in determining that Johnson failed to prove that
    Blue Chip had actual or constructive knowledge that bed bugs were present in
    Room 1253 on January 1 or 2, 2017. We therefore affirm the small-claims
    court’s judgment in favor of Blue Chip.
    [15]   Affirmed.
    Riley, J., and Kirsch, J., concur.
    Court of Appeals of Indiana | Opinion 18A-SC-788 | August 29, 2018       Page 9 of 9