Was a Mailbox Responsible for Causing a Kentucky Single-Car Accident?

Personal injury claims arising from car accidents require the plaintiff to prove the defendant’s negligence was the proximate cause of the crash. In most cases this is a fairly simple proposition. For instance, if a driver speeds through a red light and hits another car, it is easy to connect that driver’s reckless actions with the resulting crash.

Drunk Driver Killed, Passenger Seriously Injured in Crash

Negligence also requires proof that the defendant breached a duty owed to the plaintiff by law. Again, if we are talking about a two-car traffic accident, this is usually not difficult to prove. Every driver owes a duty of care to follow Kentucky traffic laws and operate their vehicles in a reasonably safe manner.

But what about the duty owed by property owners whose land is next to the road? A recent Kentucky Court of Appeals decision, Lhotsky v. Sutcliffe, addressed this scenario. This case involved a single-car accident that occurred in 2020. A drunk driver speeding at night in heavy rain crashed into a stone mailbox located along Highway 42 in Prospect. The crash killed the driver and seriously injured his passenger.

The passenger’s spouse, acting as his legal guardian, subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit. She not only named the drunk driver’s estate as a defendant but also the current owner of the house associated with the mailbox. The estate’s theory was that the property owner was negligent in allowing a “non-crashworthy” mailbox to stand as a safety hazard next to the highway.

Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals rejected this argument and dismissed the homeowner from the lawsuit. The Court of Appeals explained that the homeowner’s actions were neither “negligence per se” under Kentucky statute nor common law negligence. With respect to negligence per se, the estate’s theory was that the mailbox constituted an illegal “encroachment.” The appellate court disagreed. In the statutory context, an encroachment is an improvement to land that may “hinder or prevent use or maintenance of a road or right-of-way.” The mailbox may have been on the edge of the owner’s property, the Court concluded, but it did not hinder the road or prevent its maintenance.

As for common law negligence, the Court of Appeals concluded that the homeowner owed no duty of care to the victim under these circumstances: “Simply put, there was no evidence of any foreseeable risk based on what [the homeowner] knew at the time of this crash.” More to the point, the homeowner had no duty of care to stop a drunk driver from plowing their car into his mailbox.

Contact a Madisonville Drunk Driving Accident Lawyer Today

Drunk driving accidents often destroy the lives of multiple victims and their families. If you are in this position it is important to understand your legal options for seeking financial compensation from anyone who may be responsible. To speak with a Madisonville drunk driving accident lawyer, contact Whitfield Crosby & Flynn today to schedule a free consultation. We have offices in Madisonville, Kentucky; Chattanooga, Tennessee; and Indianapolis, Indiana.

Source:

scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2841418529152408635