Professional Documents
Culture Documents
3. Can the Plaintiffs prove that the Coast Guard was negligent in carrying out its rescue of Mr.
Sagan, and that the Coast Guards negligence proximately caused some of his injuries?
Decisions:
1. Yes
2. No
3. Yes
Reasoning:
The proximate cause element was the focus of the United States' motion for summary judgment
and the basis for the district court's grant of summary judgment. The United States does not
appear to dispute that it was negligent, and no one disputes that Mr. Sagan sustained injuries on
the night in question.
[**15] The district court found that the Plaintiffs had not produced evidence that the Coast
Guard's actions caused Mr. Sagan's injuries to be worse or more numerous than they would have
been had the Coast Guard not attempted the rescue at all. The district court characterized the
Plaintiffs' [*500] evidence as "no more than conjecture or speculation" and "insufficient to raise
an issue of fact to defeat a summary judgment motion." Sagan v. United States, 157 F. Supp. 2d
824, 829 (E.D. Mich. 2001).
The Plaintiffs base this argument on an exchange between Plaintiffs' counsel and the district
court, during which the district judge stated that quadriplegia is an "irreversible condition" and
that "we still haven't found a way to cure somebody from being a quadriplegic." Appellants' Br. at
46; J.A. at 1039-40 (Transcript of Summary Judgment Motion Hearing). Based on this exchange,
the Plaintiffs argue that the district judge in this case "allowed his own preconceptions of
quadriplegia to interfere with his judgment of the injuries suffered by Mr. Sagan." Appellants' Br.
at 48.
Separate Opinions:
[*495] [***2] DAMON J. KEITH, Circuit Judge. In this personal injury action, the Plaintiffs appeal a
September 10, 2001 order granting Defendant United States' motion for summary judgment and dismissing without
prejudice the Plaintiffs' claims against Defendants Algonac Fire Department, John Stier, Russ Seder, Jerry Doan,
and Joe Doan. For the reasons set forth below, we REVERSE [**2] the district court's grant of summary judgment
for the United States and REMAND the case for further proceedings, with the Plaintiffs' claims against the other
Defendants reinstated.
Analysis:
Sagan won the summary of judgment and there will now be a trial for the case. There was enough
sufficient evidence to REVERSE the district courts grant of summary of judgment for the United States
and REMAND the case for further proceedings, with the Plaintiffs claims against the other Defendants
reinstated.