Truss v. Lutheran South High School Ass'n of St. Louis

Missouri Court of Appeals

Truss v. Lutheran South High School Ass'n of St. Louis

200 S.W.3d 169, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 919, 2006 WL 1735339

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 27, 2006

DocketED 86513

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 200 S.W.3d 169 (Truss v. Lutheran South High School Ass'n of St. Louis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Truss v. Lutheran South High School Ass'n of St. Louis, 200 S.W.3d 169, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 919, 2006 WL 1735339 (Mo. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

BOOKER T. SHAW, Judge.

Timothy Truss and Kelley Truss (collectively, “Parents”) appeal from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Lutheran South High School Association of St. Louis, Paul Buetow, Daniel Harms, and *170 Kenneth Bauer (collectively, “School”). Parents’ daughter, Amanda Truss (“Daughter”), was killed in a tractor-trailer car collision. This is a companion case to Theresa Davis and Richard Davis v. Lutheran South High School Association of St. Louis, et al., ED86449, 2006 WL 1735211, 200 S.W.3d 163, both of which arise out of the same set of facts.

The opinion in Davis is being handed down simultaneously with this case and it would serve no jurisprudential purpose to repeat the points relied on. Parents raise three points on appeal, alleging the School breached its duty to organize and plan a school sponsored activity in a reasonably safe manner; thereby releasing Daughter into a potentially hazardous situation. Here, the record reveals that Parents permitted Daughter to attend the girls’ softball championship game. Further, Ms. Truss was aware that Daughter entered Brian Miller’s car on the morning of October 19, 2001 at the Parents’ home and was driving to Columbia with him and other students to the game.

We have discussed at length in Davis case the issue of whether the School had a duty to supervise and/or provide bus transportation to spectator students en route to Columbia, Missouri. We find that under the facts and circumstances of this case, the School did not have physical custody and control over Daughter while she was traveling to Columbia, Missouri, and therefore, no duty between her and the School existed at the time of the accident. See Pratt v. Robinson, 39 N.Y.2d 554, 384 N.Y.S.2d 749, 349 N.E.2d 849 (1976); Ramo v. Serrano, 301 A.D.2d 640, 754 N.Y.S.2d 336 (N.Y.App.Div.2003). We find the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of the School.

AFFIRMED.

KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J., Concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BOOKER T. SHAW, Judge.

Timothy Truss and Kelley Truss (collectively, “Parents”) appeal from the trial court’s grant of summary judgment to Lutheran South High School Association of St. Louis, Paul Buetow, Daniel Harms, and *170 Kenneth Bauer (collectively, “School”). Parents’ daughter, Amanda Truss (“Daughter”), was killed in a tractor-trailer car collision. This is a companion case to Theresa Davis and Richard Davis v. Lutheran South High School Association of St. Louis, et al., ED86449, 2006 WL 1735211, 200 S.W.3d 163, both of which arise out of the same set of facts.

The opinion in Davis is being handed down simultaneously with this case and it would serve no jurisprudential purpose to repeat the points relied on. Parents raise three points on appeal, alleging the School breached its duty to organize and plan a school sponsored activity in a reasonably safe manner; thereby releasing Daughter into a potentially hazardous situation. Here, the record reveals that Parents permitted Daughter to attend the girls’ softball championship game. Further, Ms. Truss was aware that Daughter entered Brian Miller’s car on the morning of October 19, 2001 at the Parents’ home and was driving to Columbia with him and other students to the game.

We have discussed at length in Davis case the issue of whether the School had a duty to supervise and/or provide bus transportation to spectator students en route to Columbia, Missouri. We find that under the facts and circumstances of this case, the School did not have physical custody and control over Daughter while she was traveling to Columbia, Missouri, and therefore, no duty between her and the School existed at the time of the accident. See Pratt v. Robinson, 39 N.Y.2d 554, 384 N.Y.S.2d 749, 349 N.E.2d 849 (1976); Ramo v. Serrano, 301 A.D.2d 640, 754 N.Y.S.2d 336 (N.Y.App.Div.2003). We find the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of the School.

AFFIRMED.

KATHIANNE KNAUP CRANE, P.J., and LAWRENCE E. MOONEY, J., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 S.W.3d 169, 2006 Mo. App. LEXIS 919, 2006 WL 1735339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/truss-v-lutheran-south-high-school-assn-of-st-louis-moctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack