Friday, October 10, 2014

Miller v. Civil Construction case brief summary


Miller v. Civil Construction case brief summary

F: P sued D after he was struck by a bullet during firearm practice in D”s gravel pit. P alleged SL that his injures arose from an ultrahazardous activity for which D was liable b/c of its control over the gravel pit or its discharge of the firearms. TC ruled in favor of D
 

I: is the sue of firearms an ultrahazardous activity covered by SL

R: No. D is liable when he damages another by a thing or activity dangerous and inappropriate to the place where it is maintained, in the light of the character of that place and its surrounding.
 

A: Risk of harm from discharging a firearm can virtually be eliminated w/ ordinary care; harm caused from firearms comes from their misuse rather than their inherent nature. The activity occurred in a firing range, and no evidence suggest sthat the gravel
pit was an inappropriate location for firearm usage. Target practice has some social use to the community when performed by law enforcement officers, demonstrating it is not ultrahazardous
 

C: affirmed
 

Co: factors in determining whether an activity is abnormally dangerous
i) existence of a high degree of risk of some harm to the person, land or chattels of others; 
ii) likelihood that the harm that results from it will be great;
iii) inability to eliminate the risk by the exercise of reasonable care;
iv) extent to which the activity is not a matter of common usage;

v) inappropriateness of the activity to the place where it is carried on; and
vi) extent to which its value to the community is outweighed by its dangerous attributes

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.