Kaechele v. Kenyon Oil Co., Inc.
747 A.2d 167, 2000 ME 39, 2000 Me. 39 (2000)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A business proprietor is liable for an assault on a patron by a third party when the proprietor had reason to anticipate the assault and failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent it. Notice of a foreseeable risk can be established by a history of prior similar incidents on the premises (general notice) or by the specific escalating conduct of the assailant (specific notice).
Facts:
- On May 4, 1994, Albert Kaechele went to an Xtra Mart convenience store to visit his wife, May Kaechele, who was working as a clerk.
- A customer, Madrid Roddy, became angry when May Kaechele refused to sell him cigarettes without identification.
- For approximately fifteen minutes, Roddy yelled obscenities and pounded on the service counter inside the store.
- After leaving the store, Roddy slammed the door and began pounding on the store's front window.
- Another person in the store suggested that the clerks call the police, but no call was made at that time.
- Albert Kaechele and another man, Armand Rowe, went outside into the parking lot where a confrontation with Roddy occurred.
- Roddy exchanged words with Kaechele and then struck him, causing severe facial injuries.
- Only after the assault took place did one of the clerks call the Auburn Police Department.
Procedural Posture:
- Albert Kaechele filed a negligence suit against Xtra Mart and its parent companies in the Superior Court (Androscoggin County), a trial court in Maine.
- The case proceeded to a jury trial.
- The jury returned a verdict finding both Xtra Mart and Kaechele negligent, but found Xtra Mart's negligence to be greater.
- The jury awarded Kaechele $210,000 in damages, which the trial court reduced to $168,000 to account for Kaechele's comparative negligence.
- Xtra Mart filed a motion for a judgment as a matter of law or for a new trial, which the trial court denied.
- Xtra Mart, as the appellant, appealed the judgment to the Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, the state's highest court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a business proprietor liable for injuries to a patron from a third-party assault when the proprietor had general notice of a risk of violence from prior incidents and failed to exercise reasonable care to prevent a specific, escalating confrontation by promptly calling the police?
Opinions:
Majority - Saufley, J.
Yes, a business proprietor is liable under these circumstances. The court reasoned that a proprietor has a duty to exercise reasonable care to protect patrons from foreseeable harm, including assaults by third parties. The foreseeability of harm, or notice, is the key to liability. In this case, Xtra Mart had both general notice, established by evidence of frequent prior police calls for violence at that location, and specific notice from Roddy's escalating fifteen-minute tirade. This evidence was sufficient for a jury to conclude that Xtra Mart should have anticipated the assault. The failure of the clerks to call the police promptly, despite witnessing the escalating behavior and being prompted to do so, constituted a breach of their duty of reasonable care. The court also held that the jury could reasonably find Xtra Mart's negligence to be greater than Kaechele's, even though Kaechele chose to confront Roddy.
Analysis:
This decision reaffirms and clarifies the scope of a business owner's duty to protect patrons from foreseeable third-party criminal acts. By allowing evidence of prior similar incidents to establish general notice of a risk, the court makes it easier for plaintiffs to prove foreseeability in premises liability cases. The ruling underscores that a business's duty is not just reactive but proactive when warning signs of a specific threat are present. This precedent will likely encourage business proprietors in high-crime areas to implement better security measures and training for employees on how to respond to escalating situations to mitigate liability.
Unlock the full brief for Kaechele v. Kenyon Oil Co., Inc.