Ya Van was severely stabbed when her daughter’s estranged husband entered Van’s home and killed the daughter. The daughter’s estate sued Van, alleging that she negligently allowed the estranged husband to enter despite prior domestic disputes and threats. The trial court denied Van’s motion for summary judgment. The Georgia Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the evidence did not create a jury question on whether Van knew or should have known that the visitor was capable of or contemplating deadly violence. The prior incidents consisted of custody-related arguments, a police call that ended without violence, and a statement about taking the dispute to court. The record also showed that Van had not been told about an earlier incident in which the visitor allegedly pushed the victim. Because a property owner cannot reasonably foresee every violent criminal act by a third party from those facts, the court held that Van was entitled to summary judgment on the negligence claim.