DAKOTA J. LACKEY v. IBERIA R-V SCHOOL DISTRICT, and JASON MORRIS
2016 Mo. App. LEXIS 195
| Mo. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Dakota Lackey, an eighth‑grader, fractured his left wrist after running to a designated “base” in gym class and colliding with a padded gym wall during a teacher‑organized long‑base game.
- No physical bases were placed on the floor; painted lines marked bases near the gym wall.
- Lackey sued teacher Jason Morris and Iberia R‑V School District; the trial court granted summary judgment for the District (sovereign immunity) and for Morris (Coverdell Act).
- On appeal the court reviews summary judgment de novo but is limited to the Rule 74.04(c) numbered‑paragraph summary judgment record.
- The court affirmed summary judgment for the District because the alleged placement of bases did not create a physical dangerous condition under § 537.600.1(2).
- The court reversed summary judgment for Morris because the Rule 74.04(c) record did not establish all elements of Coverdell immunity as a matter of law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the District waived sovereign immunity via the dangerous‑condition exception | Lackey: locating bases near wall created a dangerous physical condition that caused the injury | District: gym floor and walls were not defective or altered; placing bases does not create a statutory "dangerous condition" | Held: No waiver — summary judgment for District affirmed |
| Whether Morris is immune under the Paul D. Coverdell Teacher Protection Act | Lackey: teacher not immune because conduct created risk/harm | Morris: actions were within scope of employment and covered by Coverdell Act | Held: Reversed — summary judgment for Morris vacated because the Rule 74.04(c) record did not prove Coverdell elements |
| Whether the alleged condition qualifies as a "physical defect" or "physical deficiency" under precedent (Alexander/Cain) | Lackey: analogous to cases where placement or cutting created danger | Morris/District: courts require an actual physical alteration/placement producing danger; gym/wall were not altered | Held: Court distinguished Alexander and Cain — here no physical alteration; exception not met |
| Whether summary judgment may rest on unnumbered factual material outside Rule 74.04(c) | Lackey: n/a | Morris: relied on unnumbered "uncontroverted facts," affidavits, exhibits | Held: Court requires Rule 74.04(c) numbered paragraphs; unnumbered materials insufficient to support Coverdell summary judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- ITT Comm. Fin. Corp. v. Mid‑Am. Marine Supply Corp., 854 S.W.2d 371 (Mo. banc 1993) (standard for de novo review of summary judgment)
- Alexander v. State, 756 S.W.2d 539 (Mo. banc 1988) (placing nondefective items can create a physical dangerous condition)
- Cain v. Mo. Highways & Transp. Comm’n, 239 S.W.3d 590 (Mo. banc 2007) (actions by public employees can create dangerous condition even if object not originally defective)
- Boever v. Special Sch. Dist. of St. Louis County, 296 S.W.3d 487 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009) (dangerous condition must be physical in nature)
- Shellabarger v. Shellabarger, 317 S.W.3d 77 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010) (Rule 74.04(c) requirement for summary judgment record)
- Cross v. Drury Inns, Inc., 32 S.W.3d 632 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000) (necessity of separately numbered paragraphs and responses)
- Miller v. Ernst & Young, 892 S.W.2d 387 (Mo. Ct. App. 1995) (courts cannot sift an unstructured record to find facts for summary judgment)