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
- 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.
- Whether that duty required GNLV’s lay employees to perform the Heimlich maneuver under the circumstances.
- 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.