Negligence
Blasius v. Angel Automotive, Inc.
Dist. Ct. erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary
judgment in action alleging that defendant was negligent in performing certain
repairs/upgrades on plaintiff’s truck that caused said truck to catch fire.
While Dist. Ct. found that plaintiff could not prove causation where his expert
did not state that fire was more likely than not caused by defendant’s repair
work, Ct. of Appeals found that expert’s overall assessment created triable
issue on causation question, where expert indicated that fluid system leak(s)
constituted most likely scenario for fire, and where defendant’s repair work
encompassed removal and reattachment of all relevant fluid lines in plaintiff’s
truck. Moreover, record showed that fire started after plaintiff had driven
truck 200 miles, and defendant’s personnel told plaintiff that fuel line leak
may have started fire. Dist. Ct. also erred in finding that doctrine of res
ipsa loquitur did not apply, where: (1) any reasonably probable causes of fire
(i.e. fluid line leaks) were under defendant’s control during instant repair
job; (2) while plaintiff was in possession of truck at time of fire, no other
entity had performed services on fluid lines subsequent to instant repair; and
(3) instant vehicle fire arising out of new parts does not occur as matter of
course.
judgment in action alleging that defendant was negligent in performing certain
repairs/upgrades on plaintiff’s truck that caused said truck to catch fire.
While Dist. Ct. found that plaintiff could not prove causation where his expert
did not state that fire was more likely than not caused by defendant’s repair
work, Ct. of Appeals found that expert’s overall assessment created triable
issue on causation question, where expert indicated that fluid system leak(s)
constituted most likely scenario for fire, and where defendant’s repair work
encompassed removal and reattachment of all relevant fluid lines in plaintiff’s
truck. Moreover, record showed that fire started after plaintiff had driven
truck 200 miles, and defendant’s personnel told plaintiff that fuel line leak
may have started fire. Dist. Ct. also erred in finding that doctrine of res
ipsa loquitur did not apply, where: (1) any reasonably probable causes of fire
(i.e. fluid line leaks) were under defendant’s control during instant repair
job; (2) while plaintiff was in possession of truck at time of fire, no other
entity had performed services on fluid lines subsequent to instant repair; and
(3) instant vehicle fire arising out of new parts does not occur as matter of
course.