Opinion ID: 853033
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Summary Judgment Based on Intervening Act

Text: As an alternative to its dismissal of the amended complaint, the trial court granted the Stoffers' motion for summary judgment. Although hesitant to conclude that the Stoffers' were not negligent, the court concluded that Timothy's killing of Officer Heck was an intervening act that eliminated the casual connection between the Stoffers' negligence and the death of Officer Heck. In Hooks SuperX, Inc. v. McLaughlin, 642 N.E.2d 514 (Ind.1994), we discussed intervening acts. We held that if harm is a natural, probable, and foreseeable consequence of the first negligent act or omission, the original wrongdoer may be held liable even though other independent agencies intervene between his negligence and the ultimate result. Id. at 520. Reasonably foreseeable intervening acts therefore do not break the chain of causation and the original wrongful act will be treated as a proximate cause. Id. In this case, a gun owner's duty to safely store and keep his/her firearm protects against the very result the trial court ruled was an intervening actthat a third party would obtain the firearm and use it in the commission of a crime. Denying recovery because the very act protected against occurred would make the duty a nullity. Guns are dangerous instrumentalities that in the wrong hands have the potential to cause serious injuries. It is a responsible gun owner's duty to exercise reasonable care in the safe storage of a firearm. Amicus National Rifle Association's literature bears this point out. The NRA's Safety & Training website says: When Using or Storing a Gun, Always Follow These NRA Rules. . . . Store guns so they are not accessible to unauthorized persons. Many factors must be considered when deciding where and how to store guns. A person's particular situation will be a major part of the consideration. Dozens of gun storage devices, as well as locking devices that attach directly to the gun, are available. National Rifle Association, Safety & Training, available at http://www.nra.org/ (last visited Feb. 14, 2003). Accepting the acts set forth in the affidavits submitted, we conclude that summary judgment is improper. It is alleged that the Stoffers' stored their handgun between the cushions of a chair in their bedroom. It remains to be seen whether this constituted reasonable and ordinary care in this situation. The Stoffers argue that they did not show Timothy where the gun was hidden, but this is not dispositive. The question is whether leaving a loaded handgun in a hidden but accessible location was reasonable under these facts. This determination is a question for the jury. See Beckett v. Clinton Prairie Sch. Corp., 504 N.E.2d 552, 554 (Ind.1987) (whether defendant exercised reasonable care is a factual determination for the jury).