Elespuru v. Dick Simon Trucking ( 1998 )

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
NOV 24 1998
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
PATRICIA ELESPURU, on behalf of
Amber Elespuru,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
No. 98-8012
v. (D.C. No. 97-CV-110)
(D. Wyo.)
DICK SIMON TRUCKING, INC.,
Defendant-Appellee.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before PORFILIO, BARRETT, and KELLY , Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously to grant the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral
argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is
therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
Plaintiff appeals the district court’s entry of judgment in defendant’s favor
on her claim that the negligence of a truck driver employed by defendant
contributed to injuries her daughter sustained in a vehicle collision that occurred
in southern Wyoming on February 27, 1997. Plaintiff’s teenage daughter was a
passenger in a vehicle driven by another teenager at 60 to 65 miles per hour under
icy highway conditions. It crashed into the back of defendant’s semi-trailer truck
as the truck slowed and changed lanes to avoid an earlier accident on the
highway.
Plaintiff maintains that summary judgment was improper because there
exist three disputed issues of fact: (1) whether the truck driver had on his
four-way flashers at the time of the collision, (2) whether the truck driver was in
violation of a federal regulation, 49 C.F.R. § 392.14, requiring that a commercial
motor vehicle not be operated if driving conditions are sufficiently dangerous, and
(3) whether the truck driver’s actions were reasonable.
In this diversity action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, we apply the
law of the forum state, Wyoming, “with the objective that the result obtained in
the federal court should be the result that would be reached in [a Wyoming]
court.” Blanke v. Alexander, 152 F.3d 1224, 1228 (10th Cir. 1998) (further
quotation omitted). In applying Wyoming law, we afford no deference to the
-2-
district court’s legal rulings. See Salve Regina College v. Russell, 499 U.S. 225,
238-39 (1991).
We review de novo the district court’s grant of summary judgment, viewing
the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing summary judgment.
See McKnight v. Kimberly Clark Corp., 149 F.3d 1125, 1128 (10th Cir. 1998).
Summary judgment is appropriate if there is no genuine issue of material fact and
the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Celotex Corp. v.
Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986); Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c).
Under Wyoming law, to state a cause of action for negligence, a plaintiff
must demonstrate that the defendant’s conduct was the proximate cause of the
plaintiff’s injuries. See Lane v. Yearsley , 938 P.2d 858, 860 (Wyo. 1997) (listing
four elements of negligence cause of action). Plaintiff has not produced any
evidence to show that the accident or injury must have been the “natural and
probable consequence” of the truck driver’s actions, Century Ready-Mix Co. v.
Campbell County Sch. Dist. , 816 P.2d 795, 802 (Wyo. 1991) (quotation omitted),
and therefore she has failed to demonstrate proximate cause. The facts plaintiff
claims preclude summary judgment are not material because they do not affect the
outcome of the suit. See Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. , 477 U.S. 242, 248
(1986). Moreover, her evidence is almost entirely subject to conjecture and
speculation. See Downen v. Sinclair Oil Corp. , 887 P.2d 515, 520 (Wyo. 1994).
-3-
We hold that reasonable minds could not disagree that plaintiff failed to show a
causal connection between defendant’s acts and plaintiff’s injuries, and therefore
summary judgment was proper. See, e.g. , id.The judgment of the United States District Court for the District of
Wyoming is AFFIRMED.
Entered for the Court
John C. Porfilio
Circuit Judge
-4-