Scales v. Whitaker

• Decision Date: 29 December 2020
• Docket Number: No. ED 108785,ED 108785
• Citation: 615 S.W.3d 425
• Parties: Lynnetta SCALES, Appellant, v. Stacie WHITAKER, Defendant, and Places for People, Incorporated, Respondent.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

615 S.W.3d 425

Lynnetta SCALES, Appellant,

v. Stacie WHITAKER, Defendant,andPlaces for People, Incorporated, Respondent.

No. ED 108785

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, DIVISION ONE.

Filed: December 29, 2020

FOR APPELLANT: James P. Krupp, Ryan Krupp, 12813 Flushing Meadows Dr., Ste. 150, St. Louis, MO 63131.

FOR RESPONDENT: Stephen M. Strum, Zachary S. Merkle, Timothy C. Sansone, Lawrence S. Hall, 600 Washington Ave., 15^th Floor, St. Louis, MO 63101.

FOR DEFENDANT STACIE WHITAKER: Katherine M. Smith, 500 North Broadway, Ste. 1550, St. Louis, MO 63102.

ROBERT M. CLAYTON III, Judge

Lynnetta Scales ("Plaintiff") appeals the trial court's judgment dismissing her wrongful death claim against Places for People, Incorporated ("Defendant Places for People" or "Defendant") for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.¹ We affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

A. The Relevant, General Allegations in Plaintiff's Second Amended Petition

Because this appeal involves a grant of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, it is important to initially set out the relevant, general allegations of Plaintiff's second amended petition. These allegations are as follows.

Plaintiff is the former spouse of Marco Scales ("Decedent"), who passed away on May 1, 2018. Defendant Places for People is a Missouri corporation providing programs, services, and resources for people living with mental illnesses and substance disorders, with its principal place of business located at 4130 Lindell Boulevard in the City of St. Louis. From 2013 through April 2018, Decedent was a customer and client of Defendant Places for People.

On April 13, 2018, at approximately 9:30 or 10:00 p.m. and during a heavy rain, Decedent was walking on Missouri Route D a/k/a Page Avenue in St. Louis County ("Page Avenue"), when he was struck by a vehicle operated by defendant Stacie Whitaker. Plaintiff's second amended petition alleges that, near the time of the accident, Whitaker: was driving at excessive speed in the rain; was in the process of passing a vehicle in front of her as she accelerated; failed to use her turn signal while passing the vehicle in front of her; failed to keep a careful lookout; and was driving her car while impaired and in an intoxicated condition. As a result of the accident, Decedent suffered severe injuries, damages, and later died on May 1.

Additionally, Plaintiff alleges that at the time of vehicle-pedestrian accident, Decedent was "without adequate supervision, guidance, direction or safety precautions, including adequate housing, provided to him by [D]efendant Places for People, and as a direct and proximate result of those breaches of duty [Decedent] was struck [by Whitaker's vehicle,] thereby causing him injuries, damages and eventually death[.]" Plaintiff also alleges, (1) "[D]efendant Places for People had an affirmative duty pursuant to [section] 632.300 [RSMo 2016 ]² to have [Decedent] involuntarily committed to a mental health facility so that on April 13, 2018 [Decedent] would not have been walking in the rain in the dark and been struck and injured and killed by defendant Stacie Whitaker and her vehicle"; and (2) Defendant Places for People had a duty imposed by common law and assumed a duty to otherwise ensure Decedent's safety before and on the night of the April 13 accident.³

Finally, Plaintiff's second amended petition alleges that, as a direct and proximate result of the alleged negligence of Defendant Places for People, Plaintiff is entitled to recover compensatory and exemplary damages arising out of Decedent's injuries and death.

B. The Procedural Posture

After Decedent's death, Plaintiff filed an action asserting wrongful death claims against defendant Whitaker (Count I) and Defendant Places for People (Count II). Then, after Plaintiff filed her second amended petition, Defendant Places for People filed a motion to dismiss Count II for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Defendant's motion asserts Count II of Plaintiff's second amended petition should be dismissed because the factual allegations therein do not establish the elements of duty, breach, and proximate cause.

The trial court subsequently entered a judgment granting Defendant's motion to dismiss and dismissing Count II and Defendant Places for People with prejudice; however, the court did not specify the reasons for its dismissal. The trial court's judgment also certified the judgment for appeal as to all claims against Defendant pursuant to Missouri Supreme Court Rule 74.01(b) (2020), and found there was no just reason for delay of an appeal. Plaintiff now appeals.

II. DISCUSSION

Plaintiff raises three points on appeal, arguing the trial court erred in dismissing her wrongful death claim (Count II) against Defendant People for Places for failure to state a claim.

A. The Standard of Review, the General Law, and the Arguments in Plaintiff's Three Points on Appeal

Our review of a trial court's judgment granting a motion to dismiss is de novo. Aldridge v. Francis , 503 S.W.3d 314, 316 (Mo. App. E.D. 2016). When, as in this case, the trial court does not specify its reasons for dismissal, an appellate court presumes the court's dismissal was based on one of the reasons stated in the motion to dismiss. Tuttle v. Dobbs Tire & Auto Centers, Inc. , 590 S.W.3d 307, 310 (Mo. banc 2019).

A motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted is only a test of the adequacy of the plaintiff's petition. Aldridge , 503 S.W.3d at 316. When reviewing a motion to dismiss on appeal, we accept as true the allegations in the plaintiff's petition and liberally grant her all reasonable inferences therefrom. Id. This Court does not attempt to weigh whether the factual allegations are credible or persuasive. Id. Instead, the petition is reviewed "in an almost academic manner, to determine if the facts alleged meet the elements of a recognized cause of action, or of a cause that might be adopted in that case." Id. (quoting Nazeri v. Missouri Valley College , 860 S.W.2d 303, 306 (Mo. banc 1993) ). If a plaintiff's petition sets forth any set of facts that, if proven, would entitle her to relief, then the petition states a claim. Brewer v. Cosgrove , 498 S.W.3d 837, 843 (Mo. App. E.D. 2016).

In a negligence action based upon a theory of wrongful death, the plaintiff must adequately plead and establish, (1) the defendant owed the decedent a duty of care; (2) the defendant breached that duty; (3) the breach was the cause in fact and proximate cause of the decedent's death; and (4) as a result of the breach, the plaintiff suffered damages. Heffernan v. Reinhold , 73 S.W.3d 659, 664 (Mo. App. E.D. 2002) ; Robinson v. Missouri State Highway and Transp. Com'n , 24 S.W.3d 67, 74 (Mo. App. W.D. 2000).

In this case, Plaintiff raises three points on appeal, arguing, respectively, that the trial court erred in dismissing her wrongful death claim against Defendant People for Places for failure to state a claim because Plaintiff's second amended petition adequately pleaded the elements of, (1) duty; (2) breach; and (3) proximate cause. For the reasons discussed below, we find Plaintiff's first point on appeal arguing her petition adequately pleaded the element of duty has no merit under the circumstances of this case; therefore, our discussion of Plaintiff's first point is dispositive of this appeal. See id.

B. Plaintiff's First Point on Appeal

In Plaintiff's first point on appeal, she argues her second amended petition adequately pleaded Defendant Places for People owed Decedent a duty of care to involuntarily commit him or otherwise keep him safe before and on the night of the April 13, 2018 accident in which Decedent was walking on Page Avenue and was struck by a vehicle operated by defendant Stacie Whitaker.

1. The Relevant, Specific Allegations in Plaintiff's Second Amended Petition Regarding the Alleged Duty Defendant Places for People Owed Decedent

Plaintiff's second amended petition specifically alleges "[Defendant] Places for People had the right to control and had a duty to control [Decedent] in that their mental health coordinator(s) as a result of their personal observation and/or investigation of [Decedent] had reasonable cause to believe that the likelihood of serious harm by [Decedent] to himself or others as a result of his mental disorder, including schizophrenia, was imminent in April of 2018 unless [Decedent] was immediately taken into custody and transported to a mental health facility, and [D]efendant Places for People had an affirmative duty pursuant to [section] 632.300 to have [Decedent] involuntarily committed to a mental health facility so that on April 13, 2018 [Decedent] would not have been walking in the rain in the dark and been struck and injured and killed by defendant Stacie Whitaker and her vehicle." Plaintiff also alleges Defendant Places for People had a duty imposed by common law and assumed a duty to ensure Decedent's safety before and on the night of the April 13 accident.

Plaintiff specifically alleges Defendant Places for People had a duty to involuntarily commit or otherwise ensure Decedent's safety before and on the night of the April 13, 2018 accident and knew that Decedent presented a likelihood of serious harm to himself or others because: (1) approximately three years prior to the April 2018 pedestrian-vehicle accident (during the timeframe of March 2014 into the year of 2015), Decedent lived in residential living facilities in the City of St. Louis associated with Defendant Places for People; (2) for about three years leading up to the April 2018 accident (from June 2015 through April 2018), Defendant Places for People had a "Personal Safety & Relapse Action Plan" for Decedent; (3) for about ten months leading up to the April 2018 accident (from June 2017 through April 2018), Decedent was being treated by Defendant Places for People and the treatment notes show Decedent had "[s]evere and [p]ersistent [...