Quick Contact Site Map Disclaimer
Lee Smart Logo
Home
Our Firm
Areas of Practice
Attorneys
Resources
Clients
Contact Us
Overview Career Opportunities Newsletter
 


Retailer has no duty to secure customer's oversized load

Ganno argued that Lumbermen’s was liable under the voluntary-rescue doctrine, which can apply where one undertakes a duty that the law otherwise does not impose. Ganno asserted that Lumbermen’s undertook a duty to warn by posting a sign telling customers that it would not tie down loads, and by gratuitously helping to load and flag the beam. But the Court of Appeals noted that the voluntary-rescue doctrine applies where one takes steps to aid a person who is in danger. The rescuer can be liable for making the victim’s situation worse by increasing the danger, misleading the victim into believing the danger has been removed, or depriving the victim of assistance from others. Here, the doctrine did not apply because Lumbermen’s did not try to rescue Ganno from any danger that then existed. Its conduct that preceded the danger did not trigger the voluntary-rescue doctrine.

Ganno next asserted that the Uniform Commercial Code imposed the risk of loss on the product seller even after Ganno left Lumbermen’s premises. Again, the court disagreed. Citing UCC provisions, the court held that the risk of loss passes to the buyer on receipt of the goods, which in this case was when the beam was placed in Ganno’s truck.

Finally, Ganno argued that the Washington statute that requires the securing of all loads on vehicles before they enter public roads did not apply to him. The court examined the statute and held that it did require Ganno to secure his own load. The court rejected Ganno’s assertion that it created some percentage of fault on the part of Lumbermen’s, because no employee of Lumbermen’s operated Ganno’s truck.

<< Previous  


The Lee Smart Quarterly is a publication of the law offices of Lee, Smart, Cook, Martin & Patterson, P.S., Inc. for clients and others. It is intended as general information only and is not to be construed as legal advice. You should consult an attorney if you have any specific legal questions.

Editor: Jeffrey P. Downer Eml: jpd@leesmart.com
Phone: 206.621.3482 Toll Free: 877.624.7990

   

 


Supreme Court makes it easier to prove insurer bad faith
Retailer has no duty to secure customer's oversized load
New newsletter, new website, same firm
Around The Firm
Archived Issues

Print This Issue

 

   
 
Copyright