Title: Collins v. Thomas

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

Collins v. Thomas (2005-536)

2007 VT 92

[Filed 24-Aug-2007]


       NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to motions for reargument under
  V.R.A.P. 40 as well as formal revision before publication in the Vermont
  Reports.  Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
  Vermont Supreme Court, 109 State Street, Montpelier, Vermont 05609-0801 of
  any errors in order that corrections may be made before this opinion goes
  to press.


                                 2007 VT 92
    
                                No. 2005-536


  Sally A. Collins, Administratrix of the        Supreme Court
  Estate of David Collins and Individually,
  Chuck Collins and Amanda Collins               On Appeal from
  Windham Superior Court     

      v.  

  Nathan Thomas and Bradford Garland             January Term, 2007


  John P. Wesley, J.

  Jesse M. Corum, IV of Gale, Corum, Mabie, Cook & Prodan, Brattleboro, for 
    Plaintiffs-Appellants.

  Robin Ober Cooley of Pierson Wadhams Quinn Yates & Coffrin, Burlington, for 
    Defendant-Appellee Garland.

  PRESENT:  Reiber, C.J., Dooley, Johnson and Skoglund, JJ., and 
            Davenport, Supr. J.,  Specially Assigned

        
       ¶  1.  DOOLEY, J.  This is a wrongful death action on behalf of
  David Collins, who died tragically at age twenty after falling from the
  back of a pickup truck driven by his friend, defendant Bradford Garland. 
  Plaintiffs, the estate of Collins, his parents, and sister, appeal an order
  of the superior court finding defendant not liable as a matter of law and
  granting him summary judgment.  Plaintiffs contend that: (1) but for
  defendant's negligence in driving an uninspected, defective vehicle, the
  accident would not have occurred, and, alternatively, (2) defendant failed
  to exercise reasonable care given Collins' intoxication and, but for
  defendant's conduct, Collins would not have fallen to his death.  We
  affirm.  

       ¶  2.  The undisputed facts are as follows. (FN1)  On a late summer
  evening in 2001, Collins attended a party outside of the home of his
  friend, Nathan Thomas.  At the party were Thomas and his girlfriend,
  defendant and his girlfriend Daisy Bills, and Harold Smith. (FN2)  Collins
  and Thomas were drinking; defendant and Bills were not.   After a few
  hours, Collins and Thomas planned to leave on their motorcycles in search
  of another party.   Defendant offered to drive Collins and Thomas, who
  were, according to plaintiffs, "noticeably intoxicated."  Defendant's car
  was too small to accommodate everyone, and so several members of the group
  rode in Thomas' pickup truck.  While defendant drove, Bills rode in the
  passenger seat of the cab, and Collins, Thomas, and Smith rode unrestrained
  in the bed of the truck.  
                                                                    
       ¶  3.  Defendant drove at an appropriate speed, and there was no
  evidence that he swerved or made any other unusual or erratic maneuvers
  during the ill-fated trip.  At one point, Thomas passed an unlit cigarette
  to defendant, asking defendant to light it for him.  It is unclear whether
  Thomas passed the cigarette though the sliding window in the back of the
  cab or through the driver-side window.  Collins then passed an unlit
  cigarette to Bills.  According to plaintiffs, Collins stood up, kneeled on
  the toolbox in the truck bed, and leaned over the edge of the truck with
  one hand on the roof and one hand extended through the passenger-side
  window.  Collins shouted for Bills to light his cigarette and, according to
  Bills, she was not able to immediately retrieve the lighter from defendant,
  prompting Collins to again shout into the window for his cigarette.  
  Thomas stated in his deposition that he told Collins to "get down" from the
  toolbox, but Collins replied that he had grown up sitting on the toolbox in
  the back of his father's truck and that Thomas should not worry.  Almost
  immediately thereafter, Collins lost his balance and fell under the truck's
  rear passenger-side tire.  Thomas yelled and banged on the roof to alert
  defendant, who stopped the truck and ran to where his friend had fallen. 
  It is not clear Collins ever regained consciousness after the fall; he died
  in the hospital hours later.

       ¶  4.  Further, for purposes of summary judgment, defendant does not
  dispute the fact that the truck was in poor repair and not legally
  inspected at the time of the incident.   Specifically, it had only an
  expired New Hampshire inspection sticker and would not have passed
  inspection in Vermont due to insufficient tread on the tires, a defective
  front light, a crack in the windshield, a broken rear right shock absorber,
  and a faulty rear right brake cylinder.
   
       ¶  5.  Plaintiffs brought suit claiming defendant was negligent in
  driving the defective, uninspected truck, and that he was negligent in
  allowing Collins, whom he knew to be intoxicated, to move about the bed of
  the truck as he did.  The trial court granted defendant's motion for
  summary judgment, concluding that, as a matter of law, there was no causal
  connection between the truck's defects and Collins' death.  The court
  further agreed with defendant that "there is no common-law duty on the part
  of a sober driver to protect an intoxicated passenger from the consequences
  of the intoxicated passenger's own actions, and that the imposition of such
  a duty would be inconsistent with the social policy favoring the use of
  designated drivers."  Plaintiffs appealed.  

       ¶  6.  We review an award of summary judgment de novo, construing all
  doubts and inferences in favor of the nonmoving party.  In re Mayo Health
  Care, Inc., 2003 VT 69, ¶ 3, 175 Vt. 605,