 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hull v. Wellston Independent School District I 00412/14/2001
Modified: 04/05/2002
Mandate Issued: 04/04/2002
__ P.3d __
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF LINCOLN COUNTY, OKLAHOMA HONORABLE PAUL M. VASSAR, TRIAL JUDGE
AFFIRMED
Deborah A. Hull and Ty Bryant Hull appeal the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Wellston Independent School District I 004, Lincoln County 41(School District). The issue on appeal in this action for personal injury is whether the trial court erred in finding that the Governmental Tort Claims Act (GTCA), 51 O.S.1991 & Supp. 2000 §§ 151-258, precluded Deborah from pursuing her claims against School District. Based upon our review of the record and applicable law, we find the court did not err and affirm its order.
BACKGROUND
In August 1998, Ty, a student at Wellston High School, suffered an intra-cerebral hemorrhage while participating in a practice football game between Wellston and Bethel High School. The game was held at the Bethel football field in Bethel, Oklahoma. Ty also suffered a broken collar bone and a punctured lung. As a result of his injuries, he became permanently disabled.
In May 2000, Deborah, Ty's mother and legal guardian, filed suit against School District and members of School District's board of education. She alleged that School District's employees, specifically the football coaches, knew or had reason to know that Ty did not have parental consent to participate in the game and that he had not undergone the prerequisite medical examination; that the coaches knew Ty did not have a safe, proper helmet and had been experiencing undiagnosed medical problems for one month prior to the game; that School District failed to train its employees to recognize the symptoms of head injury and provide emergency medical care to injured players; and that School District failed to implement and maintain procedures whereby injured players could receive emergency medical care and transportation to medical facilities.
In September 2000, School District filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, arguing that section 155(20) of the GTCA, 51 O.S. Supp. 2000 § 155(20), barred Deborah's claims. Deborah responded that School District's willful and wanton negligence in hiring the football coaches placed it outside the protection of the GTCA.
Because School District's motion to dismiss contained evidentiary materials outside the pleadings, the trial court treated it as a motion for summary judgment. In an order filed April 18, 2001, the trial court found that School District was entitled to summary judgment because the GTCA prohibits Deborah's claims. Deborah appeals.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
"Summary judgment is proper only when the pleadings, affidavits, depositions, admissions or other evidentiary materials establish that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Davis v. Leitner, 1989 OK 146, 9, 782 P.2d 924, 926; see also District Court Rule 13, 12 O.S. Supp. 2000, ch. 2, app. 1. In this case, the material facts are not in dispute, and the issue we must determine is whether the GTCA prohibits Deborah's claims against School District. This presents a question of law which we review de novo, meaning that we have "plenary, independent and non-deferential authority to re-examine a trial court's legal rulings." See Salazar v. City of Okla. City, 1999 OK 20, 19 n.32, 976 P.2d 1056, 1064 n.32.
DISCUSSION
In Vanderpool v. State, 1983 OK 82, 672 P.2d 1153, the Oklahoma Supreme Court abrogated the doctrine of sove
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Oklahoma Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|