James v. Niemann
Plaintiff Stacey Leigh James brought this personal injury action against defendants Donald and Anita Niemann and their daughter, Aja Niemann,[1]for injuries James sustained in an automobile accident in August 2002. James alleged the accident occurred when Aja, who was driving a vehicle owned by her parents while intoxicated, crossed over the center line and struck Jamess vehicle head-on. James alleged the Niemanns were liable because they knew, or should have known, Aja . . . was not fit to drive the vehicle.
The Niemanns moved for summary judgment on the ground (among others) that they could not be held liable for negligently entrusting the vehicle to Aja because Aja was not a reckless or irresponsible driver before the accident or, at the very least, they had no notice she was. The trial court granted their motion, concluding there was no evidence from which Donald or Anita Niemann knew or could have known of any propensity on their daughters part to drink and drive. On appeal James contends there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the Niemanns had the information from which they could draw an inference of unfitness and [therefore] had an affirmative duty to inquire. According to James, a reasonable inference can be drawn from the evidence that Aja had previously driven the vehicle while intoxicated and that her parents, under the circumstances, should have inquired about her drinking and driving habits.
Court disagree. As will be shown, James has failed to identify any evidence from which a reasonable jury could have found the Niemanns knew or should have known that Aja was driving while intoxicated. Accordingly, Court affirm the judgment in favor of the Niemanns.
Comments on James v. Niemann