Negligent Supervision (3)
Mon, 02/25/2008 - 19:50 — DLG
Judith Roy brings this action against Clayton and Cheryl Currier ("the defendants") on behalf of the minor plaintiff, Rebecca Roy ("the plaintiff"). The plaintiff alleges that the defendants were negligent in permitting their son, Scott Currier ("Scott"), to care for her and that their negligence proximately resulted in her being sexually assaulted by the boy. The plaintiff has articulated three theories of recovery: negligent hosting, negligent entrustment and negligent supervision. The defendants seek summary judgment on all counts. The plaintiff objects.
Mon, 02/25/2008 - 19:09 — DLG
The plaintiffs file this law suit seeking damages for injuries the decedent suffered as a result of a car accident involving Jane Morgan, a woman the defendants hired to assist with an engagement party at their home. The plaintiffs allege that Ms. Morgan became intoxicated at the defendants' home and thereafter caused the accident which resulted in Edna Mae Thompson's death. As a result, the plaintiffs claim the defendants are liable as social hosts, that they are vicariously liable as the employer of Ms. Morgan, and that the defendants were negligent in their supervision of Ms. Morgan. The defendants' move for summary judgment on all counts, including counts for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
Mon, 02/25/2008 - 19:01 — DLG
The twelve year old plaintiff, Meagan Rheault, sustained serious back and eye injuries while sliding on a snow tube on a hill near her home. In this negligent supervision action brought on Meagan's behalf by her mother, plaintiff Donna Rheault, Meagan alleges that her father, defendant Joseph Rheault, breached the duty of care he owed to his daughter by allowing her to go sliding on the occasion which resulted in her injuries. The matter comes before the court at this time on the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The court concludes that the defendant's actions fall within the scope of his discretionary parental duties and cannot be found palpably unreasonable as a matter of law. Therefore the motion must be granted.