Martin v. Six Flags Over Georgia Ii, L.p. and Vice Versa

Summary

The court held that Six Flags could be liable for injuries from a criminal attack completed just beyond its property because the attack was planned and initiated in connection with events on Six Flags property, was foreseeable, and resulted from Six Flags' breach of its duty to protect invitees. The court rejected the theory that the public bus stop was part of Six Flags' premises or approaches, but held that the territorial boundary did not eliminate liability. The court also held that the error in excluding certain nonparties from fault apportionment required only a retrial on apportionment, not a full retrial. No separate opinions were filed.