Bonin v. Crepeau

Decision Date19 May 2005
Citation873 A.2d 346,2005 ME 59
PartiesRose BONIN O/B/O Adam Marchand v. Roger CREPEAU.
CourtMaine Supreme Court

873 A.2d 346
2005 ME 59

Rose BONIN O/B/O Adam Marchand
v.
Roger CREPEAU

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine.

Submitted On Briefs: February 3, 2005.

Decided: May 19, 2005.


873 A.2d 347
Randall E. Smith, Esq., Aaron P. Burns, Esq., Smith Elliott Smith & Garmey, P.A., Saco, for plaintiff

Christopher C. Dinan, Esq., Zachary I. Greenfield, Esq., Monaghan Leahy, LLP, Portland, for defendant.

Panel: CLIFFORD, RUDMAN, DANA, ALEXANDER, CALKINS, and LEVY, JJ.

DANA, J.

[¶ 1] Rose Bonin, on behalf of her minor son Adam Marchand, appeals from a summary judgment entered in the Superior Court (York County, Brennan, J.) in favor of Roger Crepeau. Bonin contends that there are questions of material fact as to whether Crepeau may be found negligent for supplying dangerous machinery to a minor. Because we agree, we vacate the judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

[¶ 2] The following facts are not in dispute. On October 19, 2001, three days before his twelfth birthday, Adam accompanied Crepeau, Crepeau's girlfriend, Annette McKey, and McKey's son Damien Tillman to a camp in Jackman where Adam was injured while driving Crepeau's all-terrain vehicle (ATV).

[¶ 3] On the ride to Jackman, Crepeau and McKey suggested that Adam could ride the ATV if he had his parents' permission. Adam stated that his parents probably would not mind. Neither Crepeau nor McKey told Adam that he had to ride the ATV, and there was no further communication between them on the subject.

[¶ 4] At some point after arriving, Damien enticed Adam to ride the ATV by offering him a Terrell Davis football card.1 Adam and Damien went outside and Damien started riding the ATV. Crepeau watched Damien ride around for five minutes before leaving the boys and going indoors. Subsequently, Damien drove Adam around. Later, Adam started driving the ATV on his own. He had no experience riding dirt bikes or ATV's, he had no idea how to operate the ATV, and no one instructed him on its operation. He was a little worried that the ATV might be dangerous because he had previously fallen off a snowmobile. Once riding, though, he lost his fear.

[¶ 5] Eventually, while riding on his own, Adam crashed the ATV and injured himself. Both Adam and Damien had been riding unsupervised for at least forty minutes. Although there was a helmet available, neither Damien nor Adam chose to wear it; it was too big and they thought it would blow off. Crepeau never suggested that they should wear a helmet.

[¶ 6] Bonin filed a complaint contending that Crepeau was negligent in supervising Adam. The court granted Crepeau's motion for a summary judgment on the ground that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact and Crepeau was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The court found that, pursuant to section 388 of the RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS (1965), Crepeau could not be liable for Adam's injuries because he did not supply Adam with the vehicle, and Adam was aware of the danger associated with

873 A.2d 348
ATV use. Bonin filed a motion for reconsideration, which the court denied, and this appeal followed

II. DISCUSSION

[¶ 7] "We review a summary judgment de novo, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom judgment has been granted to decide whether the parties' statements of material facts and the referenced record material reveal a genuine issue of material fact, and whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Doyle v. Dep't of Human Servs., 2003 ME 61, ¶ 8, 824 A.2d 48, 52 (quotation marks omitted). "A genuine issue of material fact exists when there is sufficient evidence to require a fact-finder to choose between competing versions of the truth at trial." Lever v. Acadia Hosp. Corp., 2004 ME 35, ¶ 2, 845 A.2d 1178, 1179 (citing Burdzel v. Sobus, 2000 ME 84, ¶ 6, 750 A.2d 573, 575).

[¶ 8] "To survive a defendant's motion for a summary judgment, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case for each element of her cause of action." Doyle, 2003 ME 61, ¶ 9, 824 A.2d at 52 (citing MC Assocs. v. Town of Cape Elizabeth, 2001 ME 89, ¶ 7, 773 A.2d 439, 442). "If the plaintiff presents insufficient evidence on an essential element in her cause of action, such that `the defendant would... be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
48 cases
  • Henderson v. Estate of Wiggins, Docket No. CV-2013-166
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Maine
    • 14 Mayo 2015
    ...for a summary judgment, the plaintiff[s] must establish a prima facie case for each element of [their] cause of action." Bonin v. Crepeau, 2005 ME 59, ¶ 8, 873 A.2d 346. Summary judgment is only appropriate when "the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file......
  • Richards v. Armstrong International, Inc.
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Maine
    • 25 Enero 2013
    ...in bringing about the harm." Spickler v. York, 566 A.2d 1385, 1390 (Me. 1993) (internal citations omitted); see also Bonin v. Crepeau, 2005 ME 59, ¶ 10, 873 A.2d 346 (outlining negligence cause of action for supplying a product without adequate warnings to the user); Restatement (Second) of......
  • Richards v. Armstrong Int'l, Inc., Docket No.: BCD-CV-10-19
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Maine (US)
    • 5 Abril 2012
    ...in bringing about the harm." Spickler v. York, 566 A.2d 1385, 1390 (Me. 1993) (internal citations omitted); see also Bonin v. Crepeau, 2005 ME 59, ¶ 10, 873 A.2d 346 (outlining negligence cause of action for supplying a product without adequate warnings to the user); RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF......
  • Richards v. Armstrong International, Inc.
    • United States
    • Superior Court of Maine
    • 5 Abril 2012
    ...in bringing about the harm." Spickler v. York, 566 A.2d 1385, 1390 (Me. 1993) (internal citations omitted); see also Bonin v. Crepeau, 2005 ME 59, ¶ 10, 873 A.2d 346 (outlining negligence cause of action for supplying a product without adequate warnings to the user); Restatement (Second) of......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT