Free Consultations Available

Free Consultations Available

Wife’s Lawsuit Against City for Husband’s Skateboarding Death Proceeds

Wife’s Lawsuit Against City for Husband’s Skateboarding Death Proceeds

The Supreme Court of the State of Montana has dealt another blow to the ability of governmental entities to avoid liability for personal injuries. Governments will often invoke the “public duty doctrine” as an argument against being held liable for personal injuries occurring in public and even private locations. This doctrine provides immunity from suit on the basis that a governmental entity cannot be held liable for actions taken to provide a service to the general public.

In a case decided May 19, 2015, the Supreme Court of the State of Montana again found that a governmental body can be liable, in spite of the public duty doctrine, if liability could be found under other provisions of law. In the case, Kent v. City of Columbia Falls, a skateboarder was injured and subsequently died from a skateboarding accident in a housing subdivision. The victim’s widow filed suit against, among others, the City of Columbia Falls. The City had approved plans for and been actively involved in the design of bike and pedestrian paths in the subdivision.

The Flathead County District Court had ruled for the City, effectively dismissing Kent’s case, citing the public duty doctrine. Under that doctrine, a governmental entity can be liable only if its actions fulfilled a duty to an individual, as opposed to a duty to the general public. The court found that the city’s role in reviewing and approving plans for the housing subdivision’s construction did not create a duty to Kent’s widow. Ms. Kent appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.

In December 2012, the Supreme Court had also decided a case in which it found that the public duty doctrine did not apply. In that case, involving a playground injury in Miles City, the Court said that government is not always entitled to immunity from a personal injury suit just because a public entity is the defendant. The Court pointed to the Montana Tort Claims Act, which actually provides for liability by governments. In Kent, the Court stated that the earlier case was to remind courts that if a government has a duty of reasonable care under other provisions of law, then the public duty doctrine does not apply.

If you or a loved one has suffered an injury that you believe is due to a failure on the part of a governmental body or official, call us. The law firm of Tipp & Buley has handled numerous personal injury cases across Western Montana. To schedule a confidential, one-on-one consultation to discuss your issue, visit our website online or call 406-812-7634.

Contact Us

Get a Free Consultation

"*" indicates required fields

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
How Would You Like To Be Contacted?

Practice Areas

More Posts

Can You Sue If You’re 40% at Fault in Your Montana Car Accident?

Your Rights After a Montana Car Accident When You Share Some Blame You’re driving through Missoula when another driver runs a red light and crashes into your vehicle. But you were checking your phone at impact. Now you’re injured with mounting medical bills, worried that your distraction means you can’t

Read More »

What Happens if You Refuse a Breath Test in Missoula Montana?

Facing a Breath Test Request? Understanding Your Rights When a DUI Lawyer in Montana Can Help When you see flashing lights and an officer asks "Will you take a breath test?" – your answer can impact your driving privileges, freedom, and future for years. In Montana, refusing a breath test

Read More »

3 Missoula Courts Where Your DUI Case Could Be Heard

Facing DUI Charges? Understanding Which Court Will Handle Your Case If you’ve been charged with a DUI in Missoula, understanding where your case will be heard is crucial for your defense strategy. With a viable defense, you might persuade the prosecution to drop charges, prevent license suspension, or win an

Read More »