Injuries from act of third party can be foreseeable consequence of failure to exercise care to prevent physical harm to others when rendering services and undertaking responsibility for safety of others.

In a matter that can be highly analogous to settings involving bus depots, vehicle lots and transportation hubs, the Delaware Supreme Court denied the Delaware State University’s (DSU) motion for summary judgment in a matter where six plaintiffs were injured by co-defendant Lingon’s negligent and intoxicated operation of a motor vehicle while on campus. 

DSU has a dry campus, but it failed to enforce this at a homecoming football game. They were aware that hundreds, if not thousands of people gathered at a grassy area called the “Plots” and that vehicles were allowed in the area and not blocked off. They were also aware that altercations and even a shooting had occurred in the area on prior occasions. DSU argued it could not be responsible for Lignon’s superseding action of getting out of his car, leaving it in motion, and accidentally accelerating instead of braking when he jumped back into the vehicle. 

The court concluded DSU owed a duty, that unfettered access to the area for vehicles created a risk of injury, DSU was aware of the large gatherings and the use of alcohol, that DSU was responsible for controlling traffic, and that the foreseeability question must be left to the jury in denying DSU’s motion.
 

^{Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, January 2022 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2022 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}