MILLER V. CIVIL CONSTRUCTORS, INC.
651 N.E.2d 239 (1995)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Miller (P) appealed a judgment which dismissed the strict liability
counts of his complaint against Civil (D), a construction company and a city, in P's cause
of action alleging strict liability for injuries arising out of purportedly ultra-hazardous
activity for which Ds were responsible because of their control of the premises and
discharge of firearms.
FACTS: Miller (P) sued Ds alleging that he was injured when a stray bullet ricocheted
during the course of firearm target practice in a nearby gravel pit and caused him to fall
from a truck. One of P's counts was in strict liability. The court dismissed the strict
liability counts of his complaint against Ds. Counts I and V of the complaint alleged that
Ds were strictly liable for injuries to P arising from purportedly 'ultrahazardous' activity
for which D were legally responsible either because of their control of the premises or
their discharge of firearms. P stated that D through its officers, agents or employees, knew
(alternatively in count I, 'or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known') that
'discharging firearms is an ultrahazardous, highly dangerous activity' which was the
proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries. P appealed.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment