Title: Stevenson v. Cap. Fire Mutual Aid Sys.

State: vermont

Issuer: Vermont Supreme Court

Document:

STEVENSON_V_CAP_FIRE_MUTUAL_AID_SYS.94-368; 163 Vt 623; 661 A.2d 86

[Filed 24-Mar-1995]

                               ENTRY ORDER

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 94-368

                            FEBRUARY TERM, 1995


Hazel and Lee Stevenson              }         APPEALED FROM:
                                     }
                                     }
     v.                              }         Washington Superior Court
                                     }
Capital Fire Mutual Aid System,      }
Inc., Worcester Volunteer Fire       }
Department and East Montpelier       }         DOCKET NO. S0649-93WnC
Volunteer Fire Department, Inc.      }


                     In the above entitled cause the Clerk will enter:

         Plaintiffs appeal from the trial court's order granting dismissal
for three defendants: Capital Fire Mutual Aid System, Worcester Volunteer
Fire Department, and East Montpelier Volunteer Fire Department.  The court
found that 20 V.S.A.  2990 afforded immunity to defendants for negligence
in failing to respond reasonably for the purpose of extinguishing a fire at
the Stevenson house in Calais, and that the immunity was not waived by the
defendants' purchase of liability insurance.  29 V.S.A.  1403.  On appeal,
plaintiffs assert two claims: (1) the trial court improperly granted immunity
by misconstruing 20 V.S.A.  2990 and 29 V.S.A.  1403; and (2) the trial
court failed to address plaintiffs' claims that extended beyond the limited
immunity provided in 20 V.S.A.  2990.  We affirm. 

         A trial court will dismiss a complaint that fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted.  V.R.C.P. 12(b)(6).  In reviewing a trial
court's dismissal, we must assume all factual allegations are true. 
Association of Haystack Property Owners v. Sprague, 145 Vt. 443, 444,