×
You have 2 more free articles available this month. Subscribe today.
Private Transportation Company Owes No Legal Duty To Escapee's Victim's Family
In 1999, Kyle Bell was tried and convicted of the 1993 murder of Jeanna
North by the state of North Dakota. Transcor America Inc., a private prison
transportation company, was contracted by the state of North Dakota to
transport Bell to a maximum security prison in Oregon. Bell escaped. The
North family alleges negligence and negligent infliction of emotional
distress for allowing the escape.
Transcor moved for judgment on the pleadings. Transcor argues that they
had no legal duty to the North family for the negligence claim and the
North family was not in the zone of danger nor was there a duty of care
owed for the negligent infliction of emotional distress claim. The
custodian or supervisor of a prisoner has a general duty to the public;
however, there must be a special relationship between the parties
distinguishing them from the general public for Transcor to be held liable.
Transcor had no such relationship. The North family further argues that
they were a third party beneficiary to the contract between Transcor and
the State, yet the third party must have been intended to benefit from the
contract, which was not the case. The family did not plead breach of
contract in their claim.
On December 29, 2000, the Motion for judgment of the Pleadings was granted
and the case dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted. See: North v. Transcor, SE Dist. ND, Case No.
A3 00 72.
North by the state of North Dakota. Transcor America Inc., a private prison
transportation company, was contracted by the state of North Dakota to
transport Bell to a maximum security prison in Oregon. Bell escaped. The
North family alleges negligence and negligent infliction of emotional
distress for allowing the escape.
Transcor moved for judgment on the pleadings. Transcor argues that they
had no legal duty to the North family for the negligence claim and the
North family was not in the zone of danger nor was there a duty of care
owed for the negligent infliction of emotional distress claim. The
custodian or supervisor of a prisoner has a general duty to the public;
however, there must be a special relationship between the parties
distinguishing them from the general public for Transcor to be held liable.
Transcor had no such relationship. The North family further argues that
they were a third party beneficiary to the contract between Transcor and
the State, yet the third party must have been intended to benefit from the
contract, which was not the case. The family did not plead breach of
contract in their claim.
On December 29, 2000, the Motion for judgment of the Pleadings was granted
and the case dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted. See: North v. Transcor, SE Dist. ND, Case No.
A3 00 72.
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
Related legal case
North v. Transcor
| Year | 2000 |
|---|---|
| Cite | SE Dist. ND, Case No. A3 00 72 |
| Level | State Trial Court |
| Attorney Fees | 0 |
| Damages | 0 |
| Injunction Status | N/A |