Summary
The Mississippi Supreme Court considered whether a child killed in an ATV accident on leased hunting property was an invitee or licensee as to the property trustee and hunting-club operator. The court held that the child was a licensee as to the Trust and an invitee as to Cade, but concluded that neither defendant breached a duty owed to him. It reversed the denials of summary judgment and remanded for entry of judgment in favor of both appellants.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Zachary was a licensee or invitee as to Trustmark Bank, the trustee of the property.
- Whether Trustmark owed Zachary a duty beyond refraining from willful or wanton injury and breached that duty.
- Whether Zachary was an invitee as to Cade and Ridges Plantation.
- Whether Cade breached the duty owed to an invitee by failing to keep the premises reasonably safe, warn of hidden dangers, or implement rules concerning ATV use and supervision of minors.
- Whether summary judgment was proper for both defendants.
Holdings
- Zachary was a licensee as to Trustmark because Trustmark neither promoted nor operated the hunting camp, nor received money from it.
- As a licensee, Zachary was owed only a duty by Trustmark to refrain from willfully or wantonly causing injury, and the record contained no evidence that Trustmark acted willfully or wantonly.
- Zachary was an invitee as to Cade and Ridges Plantation because his father, a paying hunting-club member, had been expressly invited onto the premises for mutual advantage and was permitted to bring Zachary at no additional charge.
- Cade owed Zachary, as an invitee, a duty to keep the premises reasonably safe and to warn of hidden dangers not in plain and open view, but the record did not show that Cade breached that duty or had a legal duty to implement ATV-use and minor-supervision rules.
- The trial court erred in denying both defendants' motions for summary judgment because no genuine issue of material fact remained concerning either defendant's breach of duty.
Key quotations
“As a licensee, the Trust owed Zachary a duty to refrain from willfully or wantonly causing injury to him.” (83)
“The law is clear; Zachary was an invitee of Cade and Ridges Plantation.” (84)
“As an invitee, Zachary also had a duty: “The invitee is still required to use in the interest of his own safety that degree of care and prudence which a person of ordinary intelligence would exercise under the same or similar circumstance.”” (84)
“No evidence exists that Cade failed to keep the premises reasonably safe or failed to warn Zachary of any hidden dangers.” (85)
Factual background
Zachary Beard died when an ATV he was operating on Ridges Plantation rolled over while he was hunting and retrieving deer stands. His father, Kenny, was a dues-paying member of an informal hunting club operated by Richard Cade and was allowed to bring his minor child to hunt without an additional fee. Zachary had extensive ATV-riding experience and was familiar with the plantation's hilly terrain, and neither Cade nor Trustmark supplied or controlled the personal ATVs used by club members. Kenny alleged that the defendants were negligent because they failed to adopt rules concerning ATV use and supervision of minors.
Procedural history
Kenny Beard sued Cade and Trustmark Bank after his son Zachary died in an ATV accident on Ridges Plantation, alleging that the defendants negligently failed to implement policies and procedures governing ATV use by unlicensed and unsupervised minors. The trial court denied both defendants' motions for summary judgment, finding factual questions concerning Zachary's status, the defendants' liability, and the diligence owed. The Mississippi Supreme Court granted interlocutory appeals, consolidated them, reversed, and remanded for entry of judgment for both appellants.
Remand instructions
Reverse the denial of both motions for summary judgment and remand for entry of judgment in favor of Richard Cade and Trustmark Bank.