Robinson v. Lindsay case brief

Robinson v. Lindsay case brief summary
598 P.2d 392 (Wash. 1979)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Defendants appealed a Court of Appeals (Washington) affirmation of a trial court's grant of plaintiff's motion for a new trial based on an improper jury instruction regarding the standard of care.

CASE FACTS

• Plaintiff was injured in a snowmobile accident and sued defendant, the thirteen-year old driver of the snowmobile. 
• The trial court instructed the jury that, in considering the claimed negligence of a child, it was the duty of that child to exercise the same care that a reasonably careful child of same age, intelligence, maturity, training, and experience would exercise under the same or similar circumstances. 
• A verdict was returned for defendant and plaintiff motioned for new trial, stating that trial judge erred in failing to instruct the jury on an adult standard of care. 
• The trial court agreed and ordered a new trial. 
• The order was affirmed by the intermediate court on appeal. 
• Defendant appealed to the highest court in the state.

DISCUSSION
The Court affirmed the lower court's holdings, stating that because defendant had engaged in the inherently dangerous activity of the operation of a snowmobile, he should have been held to an adult standard of care.

CONCLUSION

Appellate court's affirmation of trial court's grant of plaintiff's motion for a new trial was affirmed. Court stated that defendant had engaged in the inherently dangerous activity of the operation of a snowmobile, so he should have been held to an adult standard of care.

Suggested Study Aids For Tort Law