Parker Weber v. Ameriscape Inc., et al.

Summary

The Vermont Superior Court granted SBC Cedar’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed all claims against it in an action arising from a fatal motor-vehicle collision involving a truck carrying mulch. The court held that SBC neither controlled nor selected the carrier or driver, owed no applicable duty under negligence or Restatement (Second) of Torts § 324A, and was not part of a joint venture with Ameriscape or the other entities. The court also rejected the plaintiff’s request for additional discovery under Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d).

Holdings

1. SBC Cedar was not liable directly or vicariously for Singh's later negligence because Singh and Blackbird were independent contractors outside SBC Cedar's control, and the undisputed facts did not establish that SBC Cedar had authority over or selected, hired, supervised, or directed them.
2. Restatement (Second) of Torts § 324A did not impose liability on SBC Cedar because the record showed no failure to exercise reasonable care that increased the risk of harm, no undertaking of a duty owed by the contractor to third parties, and no reliance by plaintiff or a third party on a particular undertaking by SBC Cedar.
3. The evidence did not support a joint venture between SBC Cedar and Ameriscape or the other defendants because there was no agreement to share profits and losses, joint control, joint proprietary interest, or community of interest in a common business purpose.
4. Plaintiff was not entitled to additional time for discovery under Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) because he submitted no affidavit or declaration identifying specified essential facts, explaining how they could be obtained, or showing how additional discovery would create a genuine dispute of material fact.

Questions Presented

1. Whether SBC Cedar was entitled to summary judgment because it owed no duty to the plaintiffs and was not vicariously liable for the negligence of Singh or Blackbird.
2. Whether Restatement (Second) of Torts § 324A provided a basis for imposing liability on SBC Cedar based on its loading or shipper designation.
3. Whether the evidence supported liability against SBC Cedar under a joint-venture theory.
4. Whether plaintiff demonstrated a sufficient basis under Vermont Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d) to defer or deny summary judgment for additional discovery.

Disposition

dismissed