Legal Opinion
Tortes v. King County
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided June 2, 2003No. 49576-3-IPublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGrosse, J.
A common carrier owes the highest degree of care to its passengers commensurate with the practical operation of its business at the time and place in question. But as a general rule, a common carrier is not required to take measures to protect its passengers from the unforeseen intentional misconduct or criminal acts of third persons. The decision of the trial court is affirmed.
FACTS
On November 27, 1998, Silas Cool boarded a Metro bus headed southbound to downtown Seattle. As the bus approached the Aurora Avenue Bridge, Cool approached the bus driver, shot and killed the driver, and then…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- City of Canton v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Board of the County Commissioners of Bryan County v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Wilson v. SteinbachWashington Supreme Court · 1982
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Parrilla v. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
- Parrilla v. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
- Pulawa v. GTE Hawaiian TelHawaii Supreme Court · 2006
- McKown v. Simon Property Group, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2015
- Tortes v. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.