Jamerson v. Vandiver
| Decision Date | 07 April 1997 |
| Docket Number | 34660-1-I,Nos. 33863-3-,s. 33863-3- |
| Citation | 934 P.2d 1199,85 Wn.App. 564 |
| Court | Washington Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Mary JAMERSON and Frank Jamerson, Appellants, v. Geraldine VANDIVER, John Vandiver and Dean Vandiver; and Mulloy Hansen, M.D., Respondents. |
Gordon Woodley, Woodley Law Offices, Bellevue, for Appellants on Appeal.
Douglas Federspiel, Velikange Moore & Shore, Yakima, Harold Field, Ronald Unger, Murray Dunham & Murray, Seattle, Blaine Thomas Connaughton, Thorner Kennedy & Gano, Yakima, Elizabeth Ann Leedon, Bennett & Begelow PS, Seattle, Mary H. Spillane, Williams Kastner & Gibbs, Seattle, for Respondents on Appeal.
Mary and Frank Jamerson appeal the judgment entered against them in this personal injury action for psychological injuries Mary allegedly sustained as a result of childhood emotional and sexual abuse by family members. They also appeal the trial court's orders imposing costs and sanctions against their attorney under CR 11 and CR 26(g). We affirm.
In April 1991, the Jamersons filed this action against Mary's adoptive parents, Geraldine and John Vandiver ("the Vandivers"), Dean Vandiver, her adoptive brother, and Mulloy Hansen, M.D., a family practice physician who treated Mary between September 1987 and January 1989. The Jamersons alleged that Dean had emotionally and sexually abused Mary from 1968, when she was 10, to 1973. They also alleged that the Vandivers emotionally abused her and negligently failed to protect her from Dean's abuse during the same period. Finally, the Jamersons contended that Dr. Hansen negligently counseled Mary regarding her memories of childhood abuse and, later, negligently and abruptly terminated treatment. According to the complaint, Mary began to recall the abuse after she was diagnosed with multiple personality disorder in 1990. The Jamersons contend that the abuse caused Mary's alternate personalities to split off.
In September 1993, the trial court entered a directed verdict for the Vandivers on Mary's claim for negligent supervision but permitted the claims against them for willful or wanton misconduct to go to the jury. At the conclusion of trial, the jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of Dr. Hansen, the Vandivers and Dean. The trial court then granted motions for sanctions under CR 26(g) and CR 11 against the Jamersons' attorney for discovery violations and for failing adequately to investigate the factual basis for his client's emotional abuse claim against Geraldine Vandiver. After the Jamersons appealed, the trial court also issued an order directing them to reimburse Dr. Hansen for the cost of transcribing his testimony for purposes of the appeal pursuant to RAP 9.2(c).
I. Parental Negligence Claim
The Jamersons first contend that the trial court erred when it applied the parental immunity doctrine to enter a directed verdict in favor of the Vandivers on Mary's claim for negligent supervision. Because the Jamersons' claims against the Vandivers were time-barred, we do not reach the question whether the parental immunity doctrine also provided a basis for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
CJC v. Corporation of Catholic Bishop
...result of childhood sexual abuse as defined in [RCW 4.16.340(5)].... Laws of 1988, ch. 144, ? 2 (emphasis added). In Jamerson v. Vandiver, 85 Wash.App. 564, 934 P.2d 1199,review denied, 133 Wash.2d 1005, 943 P.2d 663 (1997), the Court of Appeals restricted the scope of RCW 4.16.340 to claim......
- Hayes v. City of Seattle
-
E.R.B. v. Church of God
...of childhood sexual abuse within three years of the date on which the act that caused the injury is discovered." Jamerson v. Vandiver, 85 Wash.App. 564, 567, 934 P.2d 1199, review denied, 133 Wash.2d 1005, 943 P.2d 663 (1997). RCW 4.16.340 Actions based on childhood sexual abuse. (1) All cl......
-
Funkhouser v. Wilson
...interpretation of RCW 4.16.340, the statute only applies to intentional torts and does not apply to claims sounding in negligence. In Jamerson v. Vandiver, the plaintiff, who had allegedly been sexually abused by her adoptive brother from 1968 to 1973, brought suit against her parents alleg......