Ashcraft v. Northeast Sullivan County School Corp. - Legal Case Brief

Case Name:

Ashcraft v. Northeast Sullivan County School Corp. 706 N.E. 2d 1101 (Ind. App. 1999)

Summation of Facts:

On June 12, 1993, plaintiff Heather A. Ashcraft, who was a member of the cheer squad of North Central High School in Indiana, participated in a fund raiser at Angell’s Food Center. The goal of the fund raiser was for the members of the cheer squad to raise money for new uniforms by accepting donations from washing cars. The coach of the squad, Jeri Justice, was supervising the group for the duration of the event. The food center is at the top of the incline, along with the store’s parking lot. The members of the cheer squad were washing the cars at the bottom of the incline. While washing the rear windows of another car, Ashcraft claims that she saw a car coming towards her. Ashcraft then moved to the side to allow the car to get into a nearby parking spot. The unattended vehicle (1973 Chrysler) would eventually pin Ashcraft’s right leg between itself and the car that she was washing. The unattended car belonged to Gerald Richardson, who was inside shopping. Richardson parked the Chrysler at a slant that made it so that the back end of the car was lower than the front end. He the then put it in park. Richardson claims that he was not made aware of any problems with the vehicles transmission or brakes in the three weeks that he had owned it. Ashcraft filed negligence suits on both the school (for improper supervision) and Richardson. Richardson’s case would be dismissed after reaching a settlement of claims.

Legal Issues Raised:

The legal issue raised was that of negligence on the part of the school and the driver (Richardson). The school was supposed to “exercise ordinary and reasonable care for the children”. The driver was supposed to “park safely by taking whatever measures a reasonably prudent person would take to ensure that the car, once parked and left unattended, does not roll down an incline.”

Decision of the Courts:

The decision of the lower court granted both the driver and school summary judgment. The appellate court would affirm part and reverse/remand part. The school was not thought to have breached the duty of care. The order was reversed since summary judgement was not appropriate to the possible negligence of the driver.

Rationale for Court’s Decision:

Rationale from Goldsberry v. Grubbs, 672 N.E.2d 475, 477 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996) was used in this case along with Crist v. K-Mart Corp., 653 N.E.2d 140, 142 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995).