Ladnier v. Hester
2012 Miss. LEXIS 397
| Miss. | 2012Background
- Diana Ladnier sues Joseph Hester after her late-night vehicle collision with a horse on River Road near Lucedale, alleging negligence for allowing horses to roam.
- Hester owned the enclosure where the horses were kept; fence described as field fence with 4-foot sections and various other fencing components.
- Hester claimed the fence was adequate and routinely inspected; Ladniers contested adequacy, alleging malnutrition and escape risk.
- The circuit court granted summary judgment for Hester; the Court of Appeals affirmed; the Mississippi Supreme Court granted certiorari and reversed/remanded for trial on the merits.
- On remand, Ladniers must prove each element of negligence: restraint from being at large, escape due to lack of care, and proximate injury to the motorist.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was there a genuine issue of material fact about fence adequacy? | Ladnier contends fence was inadequate and allowed escape. | Hester asserts fence was adequate and properly maintained. | Yes; material-fact issue exists requiring trial. |
| Can Ladniers prove negligence as to restraint and causation on remand? | Ladnier will show failure to restrain caused the escape and injury. | Hester argues adequate fencing and lack of proof of negligence. | Remand for trial on the merits; proof of three-element negligence required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Barrett v. Parker, 757 So.2d 182 (Miss. 2000) (negligence proof required for stray livestock cases)
- Pennyan v. Alexander, 229 Miss. 704 (Miss. 1957) (non-liability absent negligence or unlawful act by owner)
- Dennis v. Searle, 457 So.2d 941 (Miss. 1984) (issues of fact may exist where multiple reasonable inferences arise)
- Brown v. Credit Ctr., Inc., 444 So.2d 358 (Miss. 1983) (summary judgment appropriate when no genuine issue of material fact)
- Hood v. Louisville Tire Ctr., Inc., 55 So.3d 1068 (Miss. 2011) (de novo standard; trial court must view evidence favorably to nonmovant)
- Moss v. Batesville Casket Co., Inc., 935 So.2d 393 (Miss. 2006) (materiality of facts defined; burden on movant)