486 S.W.3d 316
Mo.2016Background
- On June 27, 2012, appellant Janet Delana warned Odessa Gun & Pawn manager Derrick Dady that her daughter, Colby Weathers, was severely mentally ill, had attempted suicide after buying a gun there the prior month, and would likely attempt another purchase; Delana begged the store not to sell her a gun.
- Two days later Dady sold Weathers a gun and ammunition; within an hour she used that gun to kill her father, Tex Delana. Weathers was later committed after entering a plea of not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect.
- Janet Delana sued CED Sales, Inc. (Odessa Gun & Pawn), Charles Doleshal (owner), and Derrick Dady asserting negligence, negligent entrustment, and negligence per se (the negligence per se claim was later dismissed voluntarily).
- Respondents moved for summary judgment arguing the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) preempted the negligence claims; the trial court granted summary judgment, finding PLCAA preemption and that Missouri law did not recognize negligent entrustment against sellers.
- The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed PLCAA preemption of the ordinary negligence claim, rejected appellant’s constitutional challenges to the PLCAA, but held the negligent entrustment claim fits the PLCAA exception and is recognized under Missouri law when a seller supplies a dangerous chattel with knowledge the buyer is likely to use it dangerously.
- The Court reversed summary judgment to the extent it barred the negligent entrustment claim and revived the related individual liability (veil-piercing) claims; it affirmed summary judgment as to the ordinary negligence claim and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether PLCAA preempts Delana's ordinary negligence claim | PLCAA should not bar negligence claims against sellers who breach heightened duty selling lethal instruments | PLCAA bars civil actions against sellers for damages resulting from criminal misuse of firearms | PLCAA preempts the negligence claim; dismissal affirmed |
| Whether PLCAA is constitutional (Tenth and Due Process) | Preemption unconstitutionally strips Missouri courts of common-law claims and denies due process by eliminating remedy | PLCAA is valid exercise of Congress’s commerce power and does not commandeer state branches or deny due process because exceptions remain | PLCAA constitutional; no Tenth Amendment or due-process violation |
| Whether negligent entrustment claim is preempted / recognized under Missouri law | Delana’s negligent entrustment fits PLCAA exception and Missouri recognizes supplier liability under Restatement §390 even in sales | Respondents: Missouri does not recognize negligent entrustment against sellers (relying on some MO appellate decisions) | Negligent entrustment falls within PLCAA exception and Missouri law (Restatement §390) permits such claims against sellers; claim not preempted; summary judgment reversed as to this claim |
| Whether individual defendants may be liable (veil piercing / individual negligence) | Individual liability survives if the negligent entrustment claim survives (alleged alter-ego/individual fault) | Trial court held individual claims moot because main claims failed | Because negligent entrustment claim survives, individual claims should not have been dismissed as moot; reversal for those claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Ileto v. Glock, Inc., 565 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 2009) (PLCAA preempts general tort theories including ordinary negligence)
- Coxe v. Estate of Kim, 295 P.3d 380 (Alaska 2013) (state-law negligent entrustment exception and PLCAA preemption analysis)
- Noble v. Shawnee Gun Shop, Inc., 409 S.W.3d 476 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013) (PLCAA preemption of certain claims; discussion of negligent entrustment under MO law)
- Greeno v. State, 59 S.W.3d 500 (Mo. banc 2001) (discussing effect of NGRI plea on criminal act finding)
- Beretta U.S.A. Corp. v. City of New York, 524 F.3d 384 (2d Cir. 2008) (PLCAA and Tenth Amendment/commandeering discussion)
- Bosserman v. Smith, 226 S.W. 608 (Mo. Ct. App. 1920) (seller liable for selling dangerous fireworks to children; seller-based liability recognized)
- Tharp v. Monsees, 327 S.W.2d 889 (Mo. banc 1959) (seller liability discussed where gasoline sold to a child might be dangerous)