McIntosh v. Watkins

McIntosh, 2019 OK 6 (Okla. 2019) · Supreme Court of Oklahoma · February 26, 2019 · No. 117413

Summary

The Oklahoma Supreme Court held that 47 O.S. 2011, § 10-103 permits treble damages for vehicle damage caused by a hit-and-run driver even when the victim also sustained bodily injury. The court reversed the district court’s summary judgment for the defendant and remanded for further proceedings. Several justices dissented, concluding that the statute’s treble-damages provision applied only to violations involving accidents resulting only in vehicle damage.

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Writing for the Court
Combs, J.; Gurich, C.J.; Edmondson, J.; Colbert, J.; Reif, J.; Wyrick, V.C.J.; Kauger, J.; Winchester, J.; Darby, J.
Jurisdiction
Oklahoma
Decision date
February 26, 2019
Docket number
117413
Procedural posture
Appeal from a district court order granting summary judgment to the defendant on the question whether the plaintiff could recover treble property damages under 47 O.S. 2011, § 10-103 after a hit-and-run accident involving both vehicle damage and bodily injury.
Standard of review
Summary judgment and statutory interpretation are reviewed de novo. The appellate court independently and nondeferentially examines the pleadings and evidentiary materials to determine whether a genuine issue of material fact exists.
Precedential value
published
Parties
Lee McIntosh v. Jake Watkins
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

statutory interpretationabsurdity doctrinelegislative intentstandard of reviewappellate procedure

Practice areas

statutory interpretationremediestortsappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether 47 O.S. 2011, § 10-103 authorizes treble damages for damage to an attended vehicle when the same accident also causes a nonfatal bodily injury.
  2. Whether summary judgment was proper when no material facts were disputed and the remaining issue was statutory interpretation.

Holdings

  1. When a driver collides with an attended vehicle, fails to perform the duties required by 47 O.S. 2011, § 10-104, and the vehicle is damaged, § 10-103 authorizes treble damages for the vehicle damage even if the victim also sustains an injury.
  2. Summary judgment was appropriate on the undisputed factual record, but the district court applied the wrong legal interpretation of § 10-103.

Key quotations

When a driver collides with an attended vehicle and fails to perform the duties required under 47 O.S. 2011, § 10-104, that driver, in a civil action, shall be liable for treble damages based upon the damage sustained to the vehicle. (¶ 16)

Factual background

On October 29, 2017, Jake Watkins, driving under the influence, rear-ended Lee McIntosh's attended vehicle. McIntosh and a former co-plaintiff were injured, and McIntosh's vehicle was damaged. Watkins left the scene without providing the information required by 47 O.S. 2011, § 10-104 and later pleaded no contest to DUI and leaving the scene of an accident involving damage. McIntosh settled his bodily-injury claims and was compensated for vehicle repair and diminution in value, but pursued treble damages for the vehicle damage.

Procedural history

Watkins rear-ended McIntosh's vehicle, left the scene without providing the information required by 47 O.S. 2011, § 10-104, and later pleaded no contest to DUI and leaving the scene of an accident involving damage. McIntosh settled his bodily-injury claims and received payment for repair costs and diminution in value, leaving only his claim for treble property damages. The district court granted summary judgment for Watkins, concluding that § 10-103 did not authorize treble damages because McIntosh also sustained a nonfatal injury. The Supreme Court of Oklahoma reversed and remanded.

Remand instructions

Remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion, including application of the holding that § 10-103 permits treble damages for the vehicle damage.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…