Blanc v. Jensen

12 Citing cases

  1. Redmond v. Clasen

    No. 01-20-00209-CV (Tex. App. Nov. 9, 2021)   Cited 2 times

    The first element of negligent entrustment requires either ownership or control of the car. See De Blanc ex rel. Estates of De Blanc v. Jensen, 59 S.W.3d 373, 375- 76 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.). Ownership of a car, based on established facts, is a conclusion of law.

  2. Atl. Indus. Inc. v. Blair

    457 S.W.3d 511 (Tex. App. 2014)   Cited 12 times
    Holding evidence that employee was on call and driving a truck bearing the company logo insufficient to support determination that he was within course and scope of his employment at time of accident

    Several Texas courts have concluded that ownership of the vehicle is not absolutely required. See Fox–Taylor v. Auto Market, Inc., No. 03–08–00158–CV, 2008 WL 3539992, at *1 n.1 (Tex.App.-Austin Aug. 15, 2008, no pet.) (mem. op.); Morris v. JTM Materials, Inc., 78 S.W.3d 28, 52 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2002, no pet.) ; De Blanc v. Jensen, 59 S.W.3d 373, 376 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.) ; Rodriguez v. Sciano, 18 S.W.3d 725, 728 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2000, no pet.) ; Loom Craft Carpet Mills, Inc. v. Gorrell, 823 S.W.2d 431, 432 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1992, no writ). These cases hold that a non-owner may be liable for negligent entrustment when it has the right to control the vehicle.

  3. Rivera v. United States

    No. EP-15-CV-00021-KC (W.D. Tex. Sep. 22, 2015)   Cited 3 times

    To establish a claim for negligent entrustment, a plaintiff must ultimately prove the following elements: "(1) the owner entrusted the automobile, (2) to a person who was an unlicensed, incompetent, or reckless driver, (3) who the owner knew or should have known was incompetent or reckless, (4) the driver was negligent, and (5) the driver's negligence proximately caused the accident and the plaintiff's injuries." Robson v. Gilbreath, 267 S.W.3d 401, 405 (Tex. App. 2008); see also De Blanc ex rel. Estates of De Blanc v. Jensen, 59 S.W.3d 373, 376 (Tex. App. 2001)) (citing Schneider v. Esperanza Transmission Co., 744 S.W.2d 595, 596 (Tex. 1987)). "Knowledge of the driver's incompetency when the owner gives consent is an essential element of a negligent entrustment action."

  4. Day v. Classic Autoplex GM LLC

    NO. 01-19-00744-CV (Tex. App. Apr. 27, 2021)

    To establish a claim for negligent entrustment of an automobile, a plaintiff must prove the following elements: (1) the owner entrusted the automobile, (2) to a person who was an incompetent or reckless driver, (3) who the owner knew or should have known was incompetent or reckless, (4) the driver was negligent, and (5) the driver's negligence proximately caused the accident and the plaintiff's injuries. See Mayes, 236 S.W.3d at 758; De Blanc v. Jensen, 59 S.W.3d 373, 375-76 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.). Knowledge or constructive knowledge of the driver's incompetency at the time of entrustment is an essential element of a negligent entrustment action.

  5. Annab v. Harris Cnty.

    524 S.W.3d 793 (Tex. App. 2017)   Cited 3 times

    The entrustment element requires a showing that the defendant either owned or had the right to control the chattel when the injury occurred. SeeDe Blanc v. Jensen , 59 S.W.3d 373, 376 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.). The right to control requires the entrustor have a superior possessory right to the chattel than the person to whom it was entrusted.

  6. Martinez ex rel. Deceased v. Arafat

    NO. 01-15-00161-CV (Tex. App. Feb. 25, 2016)   Cited 1 times

    The element of entrustment requires the plaintiff to show that the defendant either owned or had the right to control the vehicle when the injury occurred. De Blanc v. Jensen, 59 S.W.3d 373, 376 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.). A right to control exists if the entrustor possesses a superior right to the vehicle over the person to whom it was entrusted.

  7. Richard v. Ayala

    NO. 01-14-00354-CV (Tex. App. Nov. 10, 2015)   Cited 3 times

    However, having decided the issue of liability in Richard's favor, that ruling necessarily included a determination that Richard had established the elements of his underlying negligence claim, including that the driver proximately caused injury to Richard. See De Blanc v. Jensen, 59 S.W.3d 373, 375-76 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.) ("To establish negligent entrustment of an automobile, a plaintiff must prove . . . [that] the driver's negligence proximately caused the accident and the plaintiff's injuries."); Bedford v. Moore, 166 S.W.3d 454, 459 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2005, no pet.). The trial court noted as much in its conclusions of law, including that, "[t]o recover on a claim of negligent entrustment, a plaintiff must prove: . . . (f) [t]he driver's negligence proximately caused injury to the plaintiff."

  8. SANTANA v. AAMS

    No. 02-08-132-CV (Tex. App. Aug. 13, 2009)   Cited 1 times

    To establish negligent entrustment of an automobile, a plaintiff must prove the following elements: (1) the owner entrusted the automobile, (2) to a person who was an incompetent, or reckless driver, (3) who the owner knew or should have known was incompetent or reckless, (4) the driver was negligent, and (5) the driver's negligence proximately caused the accident and the plaintiff's injuries. De Blanc v. Jensen, 59 S.W.3d 373, 375-76 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.) (citing Schneider v. Esperanza Transmission Co., 744 S.W.2d 595, 596 (Tex. 1987)). AAMS and PAVL argue that the summary judgment evidence conclusively negates the first and second elements of negligent entrustment.

  9. Triple R v. F.W.T.A.

    No. 02-08-173-CV (Tex. App. Jan. 22, 2009)   Cited 2 times

    To establish Triple R's liability under the theory of negligent entrustment, FWTA had to show that Triple R owned the vehicle, that it entrusted the vehicle to an unlicensed, incompetent, or reckless driver that Triple R knew or should have known to be unlicensed, that the driver was negligent on the occasion in question, and that the driver's negligence proximately caused the accident. See De Blanc v. Jensen, 59 S.W.3d 373, 375-76 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.) (citing Schneider v. Esperanza Transmission Co., 744 S.W.2d 595, 596 (Tex. 1987)). A nonowner of a vehicle may be held liable for negligent entrustment of a vehicle if the nonowner has the right to control the vehicle.

  10. Robson v. Gilbreath

    267 S.W.3d 401 (Tex. App. 2008)   Cited 55 times
    Upholding sanctions against a plaintiff's attorney for failure to conduct a reasonable inquiry prior to filing suit against a father for negligent entrustment of an automobile to his son, where the only evidence of the son's alleged incompetence or recklessness was the inexperience of the driver and the collision that was the basis of the suit

    To establish negligent entrustment of an automobile, a plaintiff must prove the following elements: (1) the owner entrusted the automobile, (2) to a person who was an unlicensed, incompetent, or reckless driver, (3) who the owner knew or should have known was incompetent or reckless, (4) the driver was negligent, and (5) the driver's negligence proximately caused the accident and the plaintiffs injuries. De Blanc v. Jensen, 59 S.W.3d 373, 375-76 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2001, no pet.) (citing Schneider v. Esperanza Transmission Co., 744 S.W.2d 595, 596 (Tex. 1987)). An entrustee's previous driving record or driving habits may show incompetence, recklessness, or intemperance.