Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

D was hunting deer with William Nugent and his cousin, D. P was with a separate party hunting deer on the same property. D had seen another truck parked on the property with a 'kid' standing next to it and had assumed that there were other people hunting there. Alan's party spotted a deer, and each member of his party shot at the deer. D claims that he fired four rapid shots at the deer. D's party moved forward to determine whether they had hit the deer. About five to ten seconds later, a second deer came into view. Ernest fired multiple shots at this deer, and one of his bullets struck P. All parties acknowledge that the bullet that struck P did not come from D's gun. P's party had spotted D's party before they began shooting at the first deer. P and his father were both wearing orange hats. P waved his hat at D's party, hoping to get their attention. When the second deer came into view, P and his father began shouting as well. P sued D, Ernest, and Nugent, alleging that they had been negligent in failing to ascertain the presence of other hunters before shooting. D moved for summary judgment on the basis that P was not hit by a bullet from his gun, and that he therefore had not proximately caused P's injuries. D's motion was granted. P appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.