Piotti v. Com.

• Decision Date: 07 June 1976
• Citation: 370 Mass. 386,348 N.E.2d 425
• Parties: Jeannette C. PIOTTI, executrix v. COMMONWEALTH et al. 1
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

Page 425

348 N.E.2d 425

370 Mass. 386

Jeannette C. PIOTTI, executrix

v. COMMONWEALTH et al. ¹

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Norfolk.

Argued April 8, 1976.

Decided June 7, 1976.

James R. DeGiacomo, Boston (Loring A. Cook, III, Boston, with him) for plaintiff.

W. Channing Beucler, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the Commonwealth.

Before REARDON, QUIRICO, KAPLAN and WILKINS, JJ.

WILKINS, Justice.

The plaintiff, executrix of the estate of John J. Piotti, appeals from a judgment dismissing her complaint as to the defendant Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We granted her request for direct appellate review because this case involves the extent of the Commonwealth's immunity from liability in tort, a matter with which we have been concerned in recent years. See, in order, Morash & Sons, Inc. v. Commonwealth, 363 Mass. 612, 296 N.E.2d 461 (1973); HANNIGAN V. NEW GAMMA-DELTA CHAPTER OF KAPPA SIGMA FRATERNITY, INC., --- MASS. --- , 327 N.E.2D 882 (1975)^A; CAINE V. COMMONWEALTH, --- MASS. --- , 335 N.E.2D 340 (1975)^B. We adhere to our views previously expressed on the subject of sovereign immunity and conclude that, because the Commonwealth provided a means of compensation for losses incurred by victims of crime, dismissal of the complaint as to the Commonwealth was proper.

The plaintiff alleged against the Commonwealth that it negligently failed to provide adequate and safe custody of two juveniles in the custody of the Department of Youth Services; that the Commonwealth's agents and servants knew or should have known that the two juveniles were a threat to public safety; and that, as a result of negligence of the Commonwealth acting through certain agents or servants, the juveniles escaped and two days later attacked the plaintiff's decedent, inflicting severe injuries from which he died. Although expressing sympathy for the plaintiff in her situation, the judge dismissed the complaint against the Commonwealth because the Commonwealth had provided a remedy to victims of violent crimes. See G.L. c. 258A, inserted by St.1967, c. 852, § 1.

In this circumstance, a claim against the Commonwealth for damages based on conscious suffering and death may not be maintained. Although it may be inadequate and is fortuitous in the circumstances, relief is available under G.L. c. 258A. In a situation where the Legislature has provided some relief to the victim, we will not limit the doctrine of sovereign immunity otherwise and, thus, override the Legislature's judgment. We accept what is in effect a statutory limitation of liability because the Legislature has adverted to the subject and has expressed its intent concerning the existence and the maximum extent of the Commonwealth's liability. Our recent opinion in CAINE V. COMMONWEALTH, --- MASS. --- , 335 N.E.2D 340 (1975)^C, adumbrated the result we reach here. In that case, a statutory remedy, although potentially inadequate in amount to provide full compensation...