Page 1
Court of Appeal:
Accident Caused Car Damage but Not Injuries Incurred When Stepping Out of Rented SUV
By a MetNews Staff Writer
Div. Two of the First District Court of Appeal, deciding a case with facts like those appearing in torts casebooks, held yesterday that a man who emerged unscathed from a traffic accident that was not his fault, but was hurt days later when he “misstepped” out of an SUV he had rented while his own vehicle was being repaired, had no cause of action for his injuries against the driver who caused the collision or the owners of the bus she was driving.
As recited by plaintiff Steven Benson, when he arrived at Enterprise Rent-a-Car to return an SUV he found “too large and unwieldy,” in stepping out of it, “he thought he was placing his foot on the running board,” but “missed the running board due to its location and thus misstepped resulting in hitting the ground hard.”
In granting summary judgment to defendants, Solano Superior Court Judge Christine Carringer declared that “undisputed material facts establish that Plaintiff’s own conduct was an intervening, superseding cause of the only injury claimed by Plaintiff.” This can be resolved as a matter of law, she said, where only one conclusion can reasonably be reached.
Benson’s Contention
Benson argued on appeal:
“What could be a more foreseeable act than renting a car following damage to a vehicle? The question is: Did the Respondent’s conduct put Appellant in a position to be damaged further? Here, the only answer is YES. Accordingly, the judgment must be reversed.”
Unpersuaded, Justice Douglas P. Miller declared in yesterday’s unpublished opinion:
“The trial court got it exactly right.”
No Proximate Cause
He explained:
“Here, that Benson would misstep out of an SUV at the rental agency and allegedly severely injure his leg was not a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the vehicle collision that had taken place more than a week earlier. The driver s unsafe lane change and any dangerous condition it created at the scene of the accident on Interstate 80, were long over.”
Miller added:
“[A]lthough it may have been foreseeable that Benson would seek alternative transportation while his car was being repaired and that he might rent a car, it is unreasonable as a matter of law to conclude that respondents are liable for injury theorized by Benson to result from his renting a vehicle that was too big for him (and perhaps poorly designed) and misstepping while exiting the vehicle.”
The case is Benson v. Evans Airport Service, Inc., A163121.
Copyright 2022, Metropolitan News Company