## Facts

- After a night baseball game in Cleveland, Robert M. Gladon bought a rapid-transit ticket and boarded a Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA) train at Terminal Tower.
- Gladon had consumed approximately five 16-ounce beers.
- He exited at the West 65th Street station, where he was chased and attacked by two unknown men.
- Gladon ended up on the tracks and could not state whether he jumped or was pushed; he recalled being curled on the tracks and being kicked.
- An RTA train approached while Gladon lay with his legs draped over a rail.
- The train operator testified she was already braking, then saw a tennis shoe and a leg on the tracks, pulled the control handle back, and applied the emergency brake.
- The train struck Gladon, causing serious permanent injuries.
- Gladon sued RTA alleging (1) negligent security for failing to protect him from the assailants and (2) negligent operation for failing to perceive and avoid striking him.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to RTA on negligent security and tried negligent operation to a jury.
- The trial court instructed the jury that Gladon was an invitee as a matter of law and that RTA owed ordinary care to discover and avoid danger.
- The jury awarded Gladon approximately $2.73 million, and the court of appeals largely affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether Gladon’s status at the time of injury was invitee, licensee, or trespasser when he was on or near the tracks, and what duty RTA owed under that status.
2. Whether the trial court committed reversible error by instructing the jury that Gladon was an invitee as a matter of law and by failing to instruct on the limited duty owed to a licensee/trespasser before discovery of peril.
3. Whether the damages-cap issue raised under Ohio law needed to be decided when another issue disposed of the appeal.

## Decision

- The Ohio Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial.
- The Court held that RTA’s invitation to passengers did not extend to the area on or near the tracks; Gladon therefore was not an invitee while in the track area, but a licensee or trespasser.
- The Court held the trial court’s invitee-as-a-matter-of-law instruction and ordinary-care-to-discover instruction were erroneous and prejudicial on the negligent-operation claim.
- The Court declined to reach the constitutional question concerning statutory limits on damages because the entrant-status and instruction error required reversal.

## Legal Principles

- Ohio applies common-law entrant classifications (invitee, licensee, trespasser) to determine premises-liability duties.
- A landowner owes an invitee a duty of ordinary care for the invitee’s safety and protection.
- A landowner generally owes a licensee or trespasser only a duty to refrain from willful, wanton, or reckless conduct likely to cause injury, prior to discovery of the person’s presence.
- An entrant who exceeds the scope of the landowner’s invitation loses invitee status and becomes a licensee or trespasser.
- Jury instructions on entrant status and the timing of duty (before versus after discovery of peril) must reflect the correct legal classification; misinstruction is reversible when it may have affected the verdict.

## Conclusion

Because the track area was outside the scope of RTA’s invitation to passengers, Gladon’s status there was that of a licensee or trespasser, not an invitee; the trial court’s invitee-duty instruction improperly expanded RTA’s duty to discover and avoid danger and was prejudicial, requiring reversal and a new trial.


Gladon v. Greater Cleveland Reg'l Transit Auth., 75 Ohio St. 3d 312, 662 N.E.2d 287 (Ohio 1996)