Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Machnik v. United States

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Asheville Division

March 29, 2018

PATRICIA BLOKER MACHNIK, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER

          MARTIN REIDINGER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 33].

         I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         The Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, brings this action against the United States of America, seeking damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(b)(1), 2671-2680 (“FTCA”), for injuries she allegedly sustained after tripping on a stone walkway at the Newfound Gap observation area in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. [Doc. 1].[1]

         The United States filed the present Motion for Summary Judgment on November 28, 2017. [Doc. 33]. Pursuant to Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.3d 309 (4th Cir. 1975), the Court issued an order advising the Plaintiff of her obligations in responding to the United States' Motion. [Doc. 36]. The Plaintiff filed a Response in opposition on December 19, 2017. [Doc. 38]. The United States elected not to file a reply. [Doc. 40].

         Having been fully briefed, this matter is ripe for disposition.

         II. STANDARD OF REVIEW

         Summary judgment is proper “if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). A fact is “material” if it “might affect the outcome of the case.” News and Observer Publ'g Co. v. Raleigh-Durham Airport Auth., 597 F.3d 570, 576 (4th Cir. 2010). A “genuine dispute” exists “if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).

         A party asserting that a fact cannot be genuinely disputed must support its assertion with citations to the record or by showing that the adverse party cannot produce admissible evidence to support that fact. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1). “Regardless of whether he may ultimately be responsible for proof and persuasion, the party seeking summary judgment bears an initial burden of demonstrating the absence of a genuine issue of material fact.” Bouchat v. Baltimore Ravens Football Club, Inc., 346 F.3d 514, 522 (4th Cir. 2003). If this showing is made, the burden then shifts to the non-moving party who must convince the court that a triable issue exists. Id. Finally, in considering a party's summary judgment motion, the Court must view the pleadings and materials presented in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, and must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the non-movant as well. Adams v. Trustees of Univ. of N.C. -Wilmington, 640 F.3d 550, 556 (4th Cir. 2011).

         III. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

         The following forecast of evidence is not in dispute.

         On December 21, 2014, the Plaintiff, along with her husband and their two young granddaughters, drove from Gatlinburg, Tennessee to the Newfound Gap observation area in the portion of the Great Smoky Mountains National Park located in North Carolina. [Deposition of Patricia Machnik (“P. Machnik Dep.”), Doc. 34-1 at 22-37; Deposition of Max E. Machnik (“M. Machnik Dep.”), Doc. 34-2 at 3-20]. As the Plaintiff's husband explained:

We got out of the car. The girls got out. . . . they were kind of excited. They wanted to go look at the overview and they took off - they start taking off running. And you have to be real careful because there was just a little wall there. But before you get to the wall and the actual observation area, there's like the parking lot, sidewalk, and then a piece of grass and then a sudden drop right off of that. So ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.