In Oliver v. Tanning Bed, Inc. , after spending 18 minutes in one of Tanning Bed's beds, Sandra Oliver "suffered second degree burns over 65% of her body." She later required two hospital visits, suffered a back injury due to inactivity, and required gastric bypass surgery.
Tanning Bed admitted that its "tanning salon used stronger bulbs than other salons," but alleged that Oliver had signed a waiver when she insisted on using the tanning bed for longer than recommended. Of course, when litigation ensued no waiver was supplied and quite a few other things went awry when the case reached the Broome County Supreme Court.
First, the trial judge issued an oral decision without a stenographer present. While the parties conceded that the judge granted partial summary judgment to Tanning Bed, they differed as to "which portions of the complaint were dismissed." Next in dispute was a "proposed order" which Oliver claimed she had not seen nor timely received a copy of, and its contents were inconsistent with what the court had ordered. Finally, the trial judge retired.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, Third Department, found there were a number of unresolved questions which needed to be addressed at a formal hearing or trial, including whether "the hazard of sunburn presented by [Tanning Bed's] use of more intense tanning bulbs was open and obvious," in which case Tanning Bed would have had no duty to warn Oliver.
Without a transcript of the lower court's decision and "given the unique procedural posture of the case," the lower court's decision was reversed and the case was sent back.
Sorry, but that burned us out!
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Oliver v. Tanning Bed, Inc.