Robert Skaling v. Aetna Insurance Company

Negligence - At approximately 8:30 on the dark, rainy, and windy night of
October 20, 1995, Shaun Menard (Menard) and Marty Webber (Webber)
went for a ride in Menard's Jeep. They drove to a hiking trail in
western Coventry, Rhode Island, near the Connecticut border to go
"four wheeling" on the trail, although state regulations prohibit
motorized vehicles on hiking trails.

After driving on the trail a short distance, Menard and
Webber came to an abandoned wooden railroad trestle bridge that
crossed sixty to seventy feet above the Moosup River. A six-foot-high
chain link fence ran along each side of the bridge. Although
large boulders had been placed at both ends of the bridge to
prevent vehicles from gaining access, Menard drove his Jeep
through the woods, around the boulders, and onto the trestle.
When he arrived at the other end of the bridge, the vehicle
became stuck.

There was conflicting evidence on whether the vehicle's front
driver's side fender or front passenger's side fender was
"jammed" especially close to the edge of the bridge. Certain
facts about the Jeep are undisputed, however. The Jeep was
approximately seventy inches wide, the bridge was eighty-six
inches wide, and the Jeep was stopped at an angle, with its
lights turned off The chain link fence near the front driver's
side of the Jeep was on the ground underneath the Jeep; the Jeep
could move neither forward nor backward.

When the Jeep became stuck, Menard and Webber exited the
vehicle, climbed down the bank of the river, and spent some time
drinking beer and "partying" on the shores of the Moosup. After
each had drunk about six beers, the pair climbed back up the bank
and walked onto the bridge. Webber tried to walk past the
driver's side of the Jeep but fell off the bridge when he came to
the place where a section of fence had been torn down. After
Menard realized that Webber had fallen, he left to find help.

Robert and Deborah Skaling lived on Lewis Farm Road, at the
intersection with the trail and only several hundred feet from
the trestle. Skaling was at home with his wife and children, and
estimated that between 9:15 and 11:30 that night he had four or
five beers, as well as a nightcap. At approximately 11:45, Menard
arrived at Skaling's door, told Mrs. Skaling that his friend had
fallen off the bridge, asked her to call 911, and immediately ran
back to Webber. Skaling put on his boots and a sweatshirt,
grabbed a blanket, and drove his truck to the edge of the bridge.
He left his truck lights on and began walking across the bridge,
calling out in an effort to find Webber or Menard. As he
attempted to pass the Jeep, he found himself "edging along * * *
with [his] belly up to the vehicle as close as you can possibly
get to something." As he reached the driver's door in the area
where the fence was down, he fell off the bridge. As Skaling
fell, he struck the granite stones that provided support for the
bridge and then continued to fall to the ground below. Skaling
was severely injured in the fall and was hospitalized for two
months.

In January 1996, Skaling made a claim against Menard,
alleging that Menard's negligence caused his injuries. Menard's
automobile liability insurer paid Skaling its policy limit of
$25,000 in settlement of that claim. Skaling also sought
compensation from Aetna, pursuant to the uninsured/underinsured
motorist (UM) provisions of his own automobile insurance policy.
Aetna asserted that Skaling's injuries were not a covered claim
because they did not arise from Menard's ownership, maintenance,
or use of his Jeep, and Aetna refused Skaling's offer to
arbitrate the issue.

Skaling then filed a complaint in Superior Court seeking a
declaration that he was entitled to compensation from Aetna under
the UM provision of his insurance policy, and also seeking
damages for Aetna's alleged breach of his insurance
contract. At the close of evidence, Aetna filed a motion for
judgment as a matter of law, pursuant to Rule 50 (a) of the
Superior Court Rules of Civil Procedure, on the ground that there
was insufficient evidence that the position of the Jeep was the
proximate cause of Skaling's injuries.

A jury returned a verdict,
finding that Skaling's injuries were proximately caused by
Menard's negligence, and awarded Skaling, his wife, and two
children $1,174,500 in damages. The jury reduced its original
damage award of $1,305,000 by 10 percent, based on its
determination that Skaling's own negligence was a contributing
proximate cause of his injuries. After the jury returned its
verdict, the trial justice denied Aetna's Rule 50 (a) motion.

Unknown

Unknown

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded with instructions by the Rhode Island Supreme Court. See: ___ A.2d ___ (R.I. 1999). Note: The above date reflects the appellate court decision date, not the original trial date. Reported by kkm.