Opinion ID: 901338
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Willful and Malicious Acts

Text: [¶ 8.] State Auto argues that SDCL 25-5-15 imposes strict liability upon parents when the requirements of the statute... are met. State Auto asserts that the statutory requirements were met because it suffered damages through the `malicious and willful' acts of B.D. in taking the vehicle. Ault disagrees by focusing on B.D.'s operation of the vehicle. Ault contends that B.D. was merely negligent in causing the accident. Ault argues that because ordinary negligence was the proximate cause of the accident, the malicious and willful element of the vicarious liability statute is absent. [¶ 9.] There is no dispute that State Auto must establish that the damages were suffered through a malicious and willful act. This statutory requirement is one of causation. It requires that the person seeking recovery establish that the damages were proximately caused by a malicious and willful act of a child. [¶ 10.] The term malicious is generally defined as an act that is [s]ubstantially certain to cause injury[;] . . . [w]ithout just cause or excuse. Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed 2004). We have defined malicious as having, or done with, wicked, evil or mischievous intentions or motives; wrongful and done intentionally without just cause or excuse or as a result of ill will. State v. McGill, 536 N.W.2d 89, 94 (S.D. 1995) (citation omitted). Willful conduct involves a lower level of mens rea generally defined as an act that is [v]oluntary and intentional, but not necessarily malicious. Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed 2004). [¶ 11.] Recognizing that loss of control of the vehicle was not malicious and willful, State Auto focuses on B.D.'s taking of the vehicle. State Auto alleges that the taking was willful in that her state of mind was more than merely negligent. However, we need not consider this argument because even if the taking of the vehicle was a willful act, the statute requires more than mere willfulness. SDCL 25-5-15 requires that the child's act be malicious and willful. But here, State Auto has not identified any fact in the summary judgment record suggesting that B.D. took her grandfather's vehicle maliciously. [¶ 12.] It is important to note that the factual record for this summary judgment consisted of statements of material facts submitted by both parties. These statements reflect that B.D., while at her grandparent's home to swim, entered the house and took the suburban. With respect to B.D.'s mens rea in taking the vehicle, State Auto's statement of material facts reflects only that [w]hile in the Close's home, B.D. decided that she needed to drive into town to pick up a friend to go swimming. The statements also reflect that thereafter, while driving, B.D. encountered loose gravel on the road, was unable to control the vehicle, and rolled it a number of times. Although these statements do not reflect that B.D. had permission to take or operate the vehicle, there is no fact suggesting that any part of B.D.'s conduct at her grandfather's home was malicious. Rather, the evidence merely indicates that, while on her grandfather's premises to swim, B.D. took his vehicle without permission to pick up a friend and, thereafter, negligently lost control of the vehicle. [¶ 13.] We reiterate that State Auto was obligated to identify specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. See U.S. Bank, 2003 SD 149, ¶ 39, 673 N.W.2d at 657 (citations omitted). However, the statements of material fact do not identify anything from which the trial court could have found or inferred that the taking of B.D.'s grandfather's vehicle was malicious; i.e. [s]ubstantially certain to cause injury [w]ithout just cause or excuse . . . [;] . . . having, or done with, wicked, evil or mischievous intentions or motives; [or] wrongful and done intentionally without just cause or excuse or as a result of ill will. See supra ¶ 10. Therefore, even assuming that the taking of the vehicle was willful, State Auto has not met its burden of identifying any fact suggesting that the damages were suffered through malice.