Massachusetts: “A livery company and its driver are liable in a fatal car accident caused by a drunk passenger after he left the livery van, the state’s highest court ruled yesterday. … The court said [the hired driver] should not have dropped off a drunk passenger at a location where he would probably get into a car and drive.” (Denise Lavoie, “SJC rules livery firm negligent in crash”, AP/Boston Globe, Nov. 27).
8 Comments
The court said [the hired driver] should not have dropped off a drunk passenger at a location where he would probably get into a car and drive.
Isn’t kidnapping against the law in Massachusetts?
By the same reasoning is not the State of Massachusetts liable for damages for every crime committed in the State?
After all, does it not permit its citizens to remain on the streets and free to commit crimes, rather than locking them up?
Wow! Consider me speechless and where was he supposed to drop him off? At the mall? Te Police Station? The Zoo?
This ruling–naturally–is just plain dumb. But I think the Boston.com headline may be misleading. And, I can’t find the link on the MA SJC for the court ruling to check my suspicions.
It appears the SJC reversed a summary judgment (i.e: threw the case “back into” court). It appears the SJC maintained there indeed was a duty owed by the livery company when the trial court held otherwise.
So, I suspect the headline is mostly misleading–the SJC did not (I suspect) rule the livery firm “negligent” but rather allowed the case to proceed on its merits in superior court.
On the other hand the story indicates, “The case could now go to trial in a lower court to determine whether damages should be paid.”
This would seem to indicate the issue of liability is decided and the jury will consider only damages. If so, this decision is dumb, dumb dumb!
So, it’s either sloppy reporting or a terrible SJC ruling.
Commerce Ins. Co. v. Ultimate Livery Service, Inc.
2008 WL 4981557
November 26, 2008
As a law student studying for my Torts exam in two weeks, this is an interesting case. If the defendants are held liable, I hope there’s some kind of partial indemnity that only makes them liable for the .0001% of their actual fault for the wrongful death. Which reminds me that I need to study damages…
Let me get this straight. I get drunk, take a cab home and could be liable for my stupidly driving afterward because they dropped me near someplace I might have a car?
Would they also be liable if they dropped me someplace near a tall building I might jump off of?
If the livery driver knew that the drunken passenger was about to drive (which isn’t clear from the report) the most responsible thing to do would probably be to call the police and try to stall the passenger until they arrived.
Was the passenger obviously drunk? Or was he drunk and carrying on just fine? Should the cab driver administer a breathalyzer?
I do struggle with the duty owed here, even considering the heightened care required by common carriers.