Taylor, Marvin & Lisa Huber, V. Kent School District
81631-4
| Wash. Ct. App. | Jul 19, 2021Background
- During a high-school PE class, students (including Taylor Huber and A.N.) played touch football; teachers Kendall Anderson and another were standing in a gym doorway, not on the field. Taylor’s leg was broken after a collision with A.N.
- Taylor and her parents sued Kent School District (KSD), teacher Anderson, A.N., and A.N.’s parents for negligence, strict liability, and negligent hiring/supervision.
- KSD and Anderson moved for summary judgment arguing the Hubers could not prove causation for negligence; the trial court granted summary judgment dismissing those claims with prejudice; motion for reconsideration was denied.
- More than a year later the court held a bench trial against A.N.; the court found A.N. not negligent and Taylor assumed risk, but that bench-trial judgment was not appealed and occurred after the summary-judgment order.
- On appeal KSD argued collateral estoppel and that the Hubers relied on evidence submitted only with their reconsideration motion; the appellate court limited review to materials before the trial court on the summary-judgment motion.
- The court affirmed summary judgment, holding the Hubers failed to make a prima facie showing that KSD/Anderson’s conduct proximately caused Taylor’s injury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Collateral estoppel from the later bench trial | Hubers: bench-trial findings not applicable because this appeal challenges the earlier summary-judgment order | KSD: bench-trial findings against A.N. preclude relitigation of issues | Held: collateral estoppel inapplicable because the bench trial occurred after the summary-judgment ruling and is not part of the summary-judgment record |
| Consideration of evidence submitted with motion for reconsideration | Hubers: materials filed on reconsideration merely called to the court’s attention evidence already before the court; ask liberal construction | KSD: appellate review should ignore pages added at reconsideration stage | Held: appellate court will consider only materials before the trial court on summary judgment but will accept duplicative materials from reconsideration if they were actually before the court earlier |
| Negligence / proximate cause (was there a prima facie case) | Hubers: Anderson breached duty by not directly supervising and by failing to tell students not to dive; that breach started the chain leading to Taylor’s injury | KSD: A.N. testified he would have made the play even if teacher on the field; causation is speculative; teacher presence wouldn’t have changed conduct | Held: Hubers failed to present non-speculative evidence that Anderson’s omission proximately caused the injury; summary judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Borton & Sons, Inc. v. Burbank Props., LLC, 196 Wn.2d 199 (2020) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- LaPlante v. State, 85 Wn.2d 154 (1975) (purpose and effect of summary judgment)
- Seven Gables Corp. v. MGM/UA Entm’t Co., 106 Wn.2d 1 (1986) (opposing party may not rely on speculation to defeat summary judgment)
- Ruff v. King County, 125 Wn.2d 697 (1995) (negligence and proximate cause generally not amenable to summary judgment)
- N.L. v. Bethel Sch. Dist., 186 Wn.2d 422 (2016) (school districts owe enhanced duty to supervise and protect students)
- Hendrickson v. Moses Lake Sch. Dist., 192 Wn.2d 269 (2018) (foreseeability and duty to take reasonable steps to prevent harm among students)
- McLeod v. Grant County Sch. Dist. No. 128, 42 Wn.2d 316 (1953) (school duty to anticipate and guard against foreseeable dangers)
- Attwood v. Albertson’s Food Ctrs., Inc., 92 Wn. App. 326 (1998) (definition of proximate cause and proof by inference)