 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Craver v. Povich11/12/2003
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Miscellaneous Reports.
(*1)
Mot. Seq. No. 001
(*2)
At the outset of what appears to be the first New York case falling into an emerging category of "Talk Show Torts," the named defendants move to dismiss the complaint brought on behalf of Sheila Craver, a minor who appeared on the Maury Povich Show (the "Show"). Plaintiff alleges the defendants' negligent acts connected with the Show set in motion a chain of events which concluded with her rape. Plaintiff cross-moves for leave to amend, should the court find the complaint is inadequate.
Background
In 2001, the Show solicited "out-of-control teen" guests. The plaintiff's mother contacted the Show. During conversations with plaintiff's mother and grandmother, the Show's staff was advised that plaintiff was 14 years old, undergoing counseling, and taking medication for emotional illness, as well as that she recently had attempted suicide, lost a close immediate family member, and reported sexual intercourse with one twenty-nine year old man and five boys who were under age sixteen. It was agreed that (*3)the teen would appear on the Show and that the Show would provide the teen with follow-up psychological counseling and a corrective "teen boot camp," make transportation and hotel arrangements, and pay related expenses. After being told the teenager lived with her grandmother, the Show asked that both plaintiff's mother and grandmother accompany the plaintiff on the trip. On December 5, 2001, plaintiff, her mother and her grandmother were picked up by a limousine in their hometown of Lemphill, Texas, flown to New York City, and transported by limousine to a midtown hotel.
On December 6, 2001, the day of the taping at the studio, defendant Polly Corman and Show staff allegedly told the teen to act sexually provocative and requested that plaintiff look "sexier" by wearing her thigh-length top without slacks. In accord with that theme, plaintiff claims her sexual experience was exaggerated five-fold during the Show.
While plaintiff was watching the taping of other guests on the Show with staff members, a man approached and exchanged greetings with Show personnel. In their presence, he introduced himself to plaintiff as "Maury's limo driver," complimented plaintiff's looks and asked for contact information so that he could show her around town at night. When plaintiff's mother inquired about this exchange, an unidentified staff (*4)member told the mother not to worry because the staff had "everything under control."
Later that evening, the driver called upon plaintiff at the hotel. After being turned away by plaintiff's mother and grandmother, he persuaded plaintiff to sneak away. The complaint alleges that the driver drove plaintiff up in a limousine to a dark area, climbed in back with her, and raped her.
Based on the factual allegations summarized above, the complaint asserts causes of action for negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress, slander, negligent hiring and retention, and negligence per se. The moving defendants seek dismissal of all claims.
When considering a motion to dismiss, it is well settled that "the sole criterion is whether the pleading states a cause of action, and if from its four corners factual allegations are discerned which taken together manifest any cause of action cognizable at law, a motion for dismissal will fail" (Guggenheimer v. Ginzburg, 43 N.Y.2d 268, 275 ). The factual allegations of the complaint are to be taken as true, and the complaint must be interpreted in a fair and reasonable manner (
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 New York Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|