(Punctuation and footnotes omitted.) Garner v. Rite Aid of Ga., Inc., 265 Ga. App. 737, 739-740 ( 595 SE2d 582) (2004). Knowledge of the risk is the watchword of assumption of risk, and means both actual and subjective knowledge on the plaintiff's part.

Assumption of the risk is usually a jury issue. See Garner v. Rite Aid of Ga., 265 Ga. App. 737, 740 ( 595 SE2d 582) (2004). And it involves the person's subjective and objective knowledge of the risk:

(Punctuation and footnote omitted.) Garner v. Rite Aid of Ga., 265 Ga. App. 737, 740( 595 SE2d 582) (2004). In this case, though Bennett appreciated the general dangers associated with working around electrical wires, there is no evidence that he had a subjective knowledge or appreciation of the risk of electricity arcing from an exposed wire.

(Punctuation omitted.) Garner v. Rite Aid of Ga., 265 Ga. App. 737, 741 ( 595 SE2d 582) (2004). The above paragraph, based on mere speculation and conjecture, cannot serve as the basis for establishing proximate cause.

This Court conducts a de novo review of the evidence when reviewing a trial court's grant of summary judgment. Garner v. Rite Aid of Ga., 265 Ga. App. 737 ( 595 SE2d 582) (2004). "To prevail at summary judgment, the moving party must demonstrate that no genuine issue of material fact remains for resolution and that the undisputed facts, when viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, warrant judgment as a matter of law."

In order to effectively assert this defense, a defendant must demonstrate that the plaintiff "'(1) had actual knowledge of the danger; (2) understood and appreciated the risks associated with such danger; and (3) voluntarily exposed himself to those risks.'" Id. (quoting Garner v. Rite Aid of Ga., 265 Ga. App. 737, 739-40 (2004)). Knowledge of the risk incorporates both actual and subjective knowledge.

Riley v. Brasunas, 210 Ga.App. 865, 867, 438 S.E.2d 113 (1993).Goodman v. City of Smyrna, 230 Ga.App. 630, 632, 497 S.E.2d 372 (1998) (physical precedent); Kensington Place Owners Assn., Inc. v. Thomas, 318 Ga.App. 609, 613, 734 S.E.2d 445 (2012); Garner v. Rite Aid of Ga., Inc., 265 Ga.App. 737, 740, 595 S.E.2d 582 (2004) (physical precedent); Stewart v. Harvard, 239 Ga.App. 388, 396–397, 520 S.E.2d 752 (1999); Abee, 252 Ga. at 465–466, 314 S.E.2d 444. In the present case, undisputed evidence shows that Garrett, age 13, watched as the Taylor children repeatedly threw handfuls of sawdust into the fire, causing the fire to explode and flare. He initially watched this activity (and participated in it) at a safe distance from the fire.

(Punctuation and footnote omitted.) Garner v. Rite Aid of Ga., 265 Ga.App. 737, 739–740, 595 S.E.2d 582 (2004). Knowledge of the risk is the watchword of assumption of risk, and means both actual and subjective knowledge on the plaintiff's part.