May v. Nine Plus Properties
Absent “‘special circumstances,’” the owner or bailee of a motor vehicle has no duty to protect third persons against the possibility a thief will steal the vehicle and injure them with it. Leaving the keys in the ignition, and the vehicle unlocked and unattended, is not by itself one of these special circumstances. The issue here is whether additional factors exist sufficient to change this from an ordinary key-in-the-ignition case into one that fits the special circumstances exception to the general rule. The trial court concluded there were no special circumstances, and so granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Court agreed and affirmed.
Comments on May v. Nine Plus Properties