237 Cal. App. 4th 1276
Cal. Ct. App.2015Background
- On Nov. 26, 2009, Hayley Meyer (front-seat passenger) urged driver Brandon Coleman to take Skyview Drive and to "go faster" so the car would "catch air" over dips; Meyer knew the road's dips could make a car airborne.
- Coleman accelerated; vehicle data showed speeds around 71–81 mph seconds before impact. Coleman lost control, struck a parked car, and killed Esteban Soto.
- Plaintiffs (Navarrete and children) sued Coleman, the County, and later named Meyer, alleging (among other claims) violation of Veh. Code § 21701 (willful interference with driver) and civil conspiracy/aiding-and-abetting an unlawful exhibition of speed.
- Meyer moved for summary judgment arguing mere encouragement to speed cannot establish interference under § 21701 or conspiracy/aiding-and-abetting liability. Trial court granted summary judgment for Meyer, finding no evidence her words affected Coleman’s control.
- The Court of Appeal reversed, holding the evidence created triable issues whether Meyer (a) substantially assisted/encouraged an exhibition of speed (concert liability/aiding-and-abetting/conspiracy) and (b) willfully interfered with driver control under § 21701.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Meyer's encouragement created joint liability under concert-of-action/aiding-and-abetting for Coleman's unlawful exhibition of speed | Meyer urged Coleman to speed and knew the road would make the car airborne; her encouragement was substantial assistance making her a cotortfeasor | Mere verbal encouragement, especially by a passenger, cannot impose joint liability absent proof it affected driver control or showed intent to commit a tort | Reversed: factual evidence (Meyer's knowledge and urging; Coleman’s acceleration) raises triable issues of concert/aiding-and-abetting liability |
| Whether civil conspiracy liability lies against Meyer | Meyer and Coleman formed an express or tacit agreement to commit an unlawful exhibition of speed; conspiracy can be predicated on an agreement to commit a civil wrong | Conspiracy cannot be based on negligence alone or an unintentional act; parties must intend the wrongful outcome | Reversed: evidence supports an inference of tacit agreement to commit the unlawful exhibition of speed and thus raises triable issues on conspiracy liability |
| Whether Meyer violated Veh. Code § 21701 (willful interference with driver) | Meyer intentionally encouraged speeding on a road she knew would cause the vehicle to become airborne, which affected the driver’s control | Meyer’s words were mere directions/encouragement; Coleman freely chose to accelerate and his loss of control was his conduct, not her interference | Reversed: § 21701 reaches nonphysical interference; Meyer’s knowledge and exhortations create a triable issue whether she willfully interfered so as to affect driver control |
| Whether summary judgment was appropriate | Plaintiff: viewed in plaintiff’s favor, the record raises jury questions on each theory | Defendant: moving record showed no evidence Meyer’s statements affected control or proved agreement/intent; summary judgment proper | Reversed: material facts in dispute preclude summary judgment; issues must go to a jury |
Key Cases Cited
- Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories, 26 Cal.3d 588 (California Supreme Court) (explains concert-of-action liability and tacit agreement theory)
- Agovino v. Kunze, 181 Cal.App.2d 591 (Cal. Ct. App.) (passenger/participant liability in high-speed racing context)
- Orser v. George, 252 Cal.App.2d 660 (Cal. Ct. App.) (concert liability can apply to a participant who did not fire the fatal shot but alternated acts with others)
- Reclusado v. Mangum, 228 Cal.App.2d 8 (Cal. Ct. App.) (§ 21701 covers nonphysical interference that affects driver control)
- In re Harvill, 168 Cal.App.2d 490 (Cal. Ct. App.) (definition of "exhibition of speed"—displaying vehicle speed to others)
- People v. Grier, 226 Cal.App.2d 360 (Cal. Ct. App.) (loss of traction/skidding diminishes driver control and can constitute exhibition of speed)
- Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd., 7 Cal.4th 503 (California Supreme Court) (civil conspiracy is not an independent cause but a theory imposing joint liability for an underlying tort)
- Cadlo v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 125 Cal.App.4th 513 (Cal. Ct. App.) (discusses concert-of-action/aiding-and-abetting principles in civil context)