Miller v. Civil Constructors, Inc. case brief

Miller v. Civil Constructors, Inc. case brief
1995 

Facts: Plaintiff was injured when a stray bullet ricocheted during the course of firearm practice and caused him to fall from a truck. Two counts, alleging that owner of gravel pit and employer of cops engaged in firearm practice were strictly liable for injuries arising from this ultrahazardous activity because of their control of the premises or control of employees. The case was dismissed. 

Decision: Affirmed for defendant 

Reasoning: Rule of English courts is that defendant will be liable when he damages another by a thing or activity unduly dangerous and inappropriate to the place where its maintained in the light of the character of the place and its surroundings. 

Usually, the presence of more than one factor will impose strict liability because it is a dangerous activity. Court thinks that guns or firearms being used here should not be classified as ultrahazardous because of the above factors. 

Holding: An analysis of the 6 factors are necessary to determine if a certain activity is abnormally dangerous and should be protected against 

Check out our eBook: How to Win at Law School to see how to transfer to a top school, get the top grades in your class, and get a head start on the legal profession!

Check out our store on Etsy: http://www.bohobuttons.com