## Facts

- Bobby Lee Sturms ate at the Carson Street Café inside the Golden Nugget Hotel and Casino, operated by GNLV Corporation.
- Sturms was intoxicated; testing later showed a 0.32% blood-alcohol content.
- After eating a few bites, Sturms appeared nauseated, vomited, slumped in his chair, and closed his eyes; his companion believed he had blacked out.
- A waitress and security personnel arrived within about a minute, checked his condition, and noted a strong pulse.
- Sturms did not cough, choke, or display signs suggesting an airway obstruction to those present.
- When Sturms’ pulse began to slow, personnel requested emergency assistance, and paramedics were summoned.
- Paramedics arrived and took over care; Sturms later was determined to have died from a fatal airway obstruction caused by food.
- Sturms’ widow sued for wrongful death, alleging employees negligently failed to perform the Heimlich maneuver; the trial court granted summary judgment to GNLV.

## Issues

1. Whether a business proprietor owes a duty to take reasonable action to aid a patron when it knows or should know the patron is ill or in distress.
2. Whether that duty required GNLV’s lay employees to perform the Heimlich maneuver under the circumstances.
3. Whether breach of the duty could be resolved on summary judgment where the material facts about the employees’ response were undisputed.

## Decision

- The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for GNLV.
- The court held GNLV owed Sturms a duty to act reasonably once it became aware he needed assistance.
- The court held the duty of reasonable aid did not require employees to perform the Heimlich maneuver or other specialized medical procedures.
- On the undisputed facts—rapid response, basic monitoring, and prompt summoning of paramedics, without observable choking—GNLV’s employees acted reasonably as a matter of law, so no triable issue of breach existed.

## Legal Principles

- A business proprietor has a special relationship with patrons that imposes a duty to take reasonable action to aid or protect an invitee when the proprietor knows or should know the invitee is in danger or in need of assistance.
- The reasonable-aid duty generally includes providing reasonable assistance and summoning professional medical help, not requiring non-medical employees to administer specialized medical techniques such as the Heimlich maneuver.
- Although breach is commonly a jury question, summary judgment is proper when the material facts are undisputed and only one reasonable conclusion about the defendant’s conduct can be drawn.

## Conclusion

A casino restaurant must take reasonable steps to assist a patron in distress, but it is not legally required to have lay employees perform the Heimlich maneuver; where staff promptly rendered basic aid and called paramedics in the absence of observable choking, the proprietor did not breach its duty as a matter of law.


Lee v. GNLV Corp., 117 Nev. 291, 22 P.3d 209 (Nev. 2001)