Laurel Yamaha, Inc. v. Freeman
| Docket Number: | 2005-IA-01605-SCT | |
| Oral Argument: | 02-06-2007 | |
* This video is best viewed in the most current version of Google Chrome, Internet Explorer with Windows Media Player plug-in, or Safari (Mac Users). |
||
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 05-31-2007 Opinion Author: RANDOLPH, J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Negligent entrustment - Negligence - Section 63-1-6 - Section 63-1-63 - Size of helmet Judge(s) Concurring: SMITH, C.J., WALLER AND DIAZ, P.JJ., EASLEY, CARLSON AND DICKINSON, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): LAMAR, J. Dissenting Author : GRAVES, J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - OTHER |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 08-15-2005 Appealed from: Jones County Circuit Court Judge: Billy Joe Landrum Disposition: Denied Appellant's Motion for Summary Judgment |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | LAUREL YAMAHA, INC. |
LAURA L. GIBBES
JOHN H. HOLLOMAN, III
F. HALL BAILEY |
||
| Appellee: | NORMAN DECKER FREEMAN AND SUSAN FREEMAN, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF OF THE WRONGFUL DEATH BENEFICIARIES OF CHRISTOPHER BRANDON FREEMAN | CRAIG N. ORR ROBERT D. GHOLSON |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Negligent entrustment - Negligence - Section 63-1-6 - Section 63-1-63 - Size of helmet |
| Summary of the Facts: | Norman Freeman and Susan Freeman filed a wrongful death action against Laurel Yamaha, Inc., after their son, Christopher Freeman, had an accident on a Yamaha YZF600R sport motorcycle he purchased from Laurel Yamaha which resulted in his death. Laurel Yamaha filed a motion for summary judgment which the court denied. The Supreme Court granted Laurel Yamaha’s Petition for Interlocutory Appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Negligent entrustment The Freemans argue that Laurel Yamaha should be liable for negligent entrustment of the motorcycle to their son, because it knew or had reason to know, that he, because of his youth and inexperience, or otherwise, would use it in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical harm to himself. Laurel Yamaha argues that Mississippi law does not establish a claim of negligent entrustment in the context of a sales transaction. The paramount requirement for liability under the theory of negligent entrustment is whether the defendant had a right to control the vehicle. In this case, once the purchase was completed, ownership and control of the motorcycle passed to Freeman on April 10, 2004. The accident occurred on April 13, 2004. At the time of the accident, Freeman clearly owned, controlled and was in possession of the motorcycle, with no right to control enjoyed by Laurel Yamaha. Absent the right to control, no action lies for negligent entrustment. Issue 2: Negligence The Freemans argue that Laurel Yamaha’s sale to their son constituted a knowing sale and relinquishment of a dangerous instrumentality and was violative of sections 63-1-6 and 63-1-63. It is uncontested that Freeman produced his driver’s license to the salesman who was aware that Freeman’s license did not bear an “E” endorsement. However, an “E” endorsement is not a prerequisite for purchasing a motorcycle in the state of Mississippi. An “E” endorsement is required for operating a motorcycle on the highways in Mississippi. The Freemans argue that allowing their son to purchase a motorcycle without an “E” endorsement is a violation of public policy. However, this contention does not comport with the mandates of section 63-1-6. The Freemans also argue that Laurel Yamaha violated section 63-1-63 and that this constituted negligence per se. Section 63-1-63 provides that “[n]o person shall authorize or knowingly permit a motor vehicle owned by him or under his control to be driven upon any highway by any person who is not authorized under the provisions of this article or in violation of any of the provisions of this article.” Freeman was age eighteen when he purchased this motorcycle. Section 93-19-13 permits all persons eighteen years of age or older to enter into binding contractual relationships affecting personal property. Once Freeman gained legal title to the motorcycle and it was in his possession, he controlled its use. Accordingly, the statute does not impose a duty on Laurel Yamaha, because when this accident occurred, the motorcycle was not owned by Laurel Yamaha or under its control. Issue 3: Size of helmet The Freemans argue that their son should have been sold a “small” instead of a “medium” sized helmet. However, there was no evidence provided that would allow a determination that Laurel Yamaha did or did not follow any sort of procedure in the fitting or sale of the helmet. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
