Stout v. Warren
Washington Supreme Court
290 P.3d 972 (2012)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
After Larry Stout (plaintiff) failed to appear for two hearings while out on bail, CJ Johnson Bail Bonds (defendant) contracted with C.C.S.R. (defendant) to apprehend him. Bounty hunter Carl Warren (defendant) apprehended Stout by rear-ending his vehicle, causing Stout to collide with a tree and suffer serious injury. In addition to Warren, Stout sued the contractor and owners of the bail-bond company, asserting two theories of vicarious liability. Stout argued that the company had contracted with Warren to perform an activity that was either (1) abnormally dangerous or (2) involved a special danger or peculiar risk of harm. The trial court granted summary judgment for the owners of the bail-bond company, finding no vicarious liability applied. The appellate court affirmed, albeit on different grounds, prompting Stout to appeal to the Washington Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Stephens, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
