Lexplug logoLexplug

Basler v. Webb

Appellate Court of Illinois
544 N.E.2d 60, 135 Ill. Dec. 703, 188 Ill. App. 3d 178 (1989)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A cause of action for negligent control is stated if a guardian knew of their ability to control a child and the necessity for doing so, even without prior similar harmful acts, if they knew the child would disobey commands regarding a dangerous instrument. A cause of action for negligent entrustment requires an explicit allegation that the entrustee's incompetence was the proximate cause of the injury.


Facts:

  • Donald and Francis Webb were the grandparents and legal guardians of six-year-old Tanya Webb.
  • The Webbs provided Tanya with a bicycle that had no brakes and knew it was defective.
  • The Webbs knew that Tanya customarily rode her bicycle down an extremely steep street.
  • The Webbs were aware that Tanya would disobey direct commands and ride the bicycle despite its defective condition.
  • On April 22, 1987, Tanya was riding the bicycle without brakes.
  • Tanya's bicycle collided with nine-year-old Michael W. Gee, who was crossing the street, causing him serious injury.

Procedural Posture:

  • Lorraine A. Easier, on behalf of her son Michael W. Gee, filed a complaint against Donald and Francis Webb in the circuit court of Union County, a trial court.
  • The complaint alleged two causes of action: negligent control and negligent entrustment.
  • The Webbs filed a motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.
  • The trial court granted Easier an opportunity to amend her complaint, but she chose to stand on her original pleadings.
  • The trial court dismissed Easier's complaint with prejudice.
  • Easier, as appellant, appealed the dismissal to the Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does a complaint state a valid cause of action for negligent control and negligent entrustment where it alleges that guardians knew their six-year-old ward would disobediently ride a bicycle without brakes on a steep street, but does not explicitly allege that the child's incompetence was the proximate cause of the resulting injury?


Opinions:

Majority - Justice Rarick

Yes, as to negligent control; No, as to negligent entrustment. A complaint sufficiently pleads negligent control under Section 316 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts by alleging that guardians had the ability to control their child, knew the child would disobediently use a dangerous instrument (a bike with no brakes), and knew of the necessity to exercise control. However, a complaint for negligent entrustment is deficient if it fails to explicitly allege a causal relationship between the child's incompetence and the plaintiff's injury. The court found the allegations sufficient for negligent control because the Webbs knew Tanya would disobey them regarding the broken bicycle and rode it on a steep street, making the danger foreseeable and establishing the necessity for control. In contrast, the negligent entrustment claim failed because Lorraine Easier's complaint did not specifically allege that Tanya's incompetence was the proximate cause of Michael Gee's injuries, which is a required element for that cause of action.



Analysis:

This case clarifies the pleading standards for two distinct but related torts involving parental/guardian liability. It establishes that for negligent control, knowledge of a child's specific propensity for disobedience regarding a known danger can substitute for a history of prior similar harmful acts. The decision reinforces the importance of precise pleading, particularly for negligent entrustment, where the plaintiff must explicitly connect the entrustee's incompetence to the resulting harm as the proximate cause. This ruling guides future plaintiffs to be meticulous in alleging each element of a cause of action, as a failure to plead a key element like proximate cause can be fatal to a claim, even if the underlying facts seem compelling.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Basler v. Webb (1989) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Basler v. Webb