Significant Proximate Cause Ruling by Missouri Supreme Court – Intervening Criminal Act not Foreseeable

The Missouri Supreme Court has vacated and remanded a lower court’s decision in a lawsuit filed by a fourth grader who was hit by a car when exiting his school bus.  The decision was issued on February 28, 2025, in the case of D.J. v. First Student, Inc.

At trial, the St. Louis Circuit Court jury returned a verdict of $1.3 million for the Plaintiff.  The suit brought on behalf of a minor, involved a left ankle fracture and right ankle sprain.

In a 5-2 decision, the state’s highest court determined First Student Inc. (the bus company) was entitled to judgment notwithstanding the verdict because D.J. (the student) failed to prove that an action taken or not taken by the company was the proximate cause of his injuries.  D.J. sustained injuries when struck by a hit-and-run driver.

D.J. argued that the company, through its agent, the bus driver, negligently dropped him off at an unsafe location. Additionally, D.J. argued, “First Student negligently failed to provide its driver with a route sheet, negligently failed to advise its driver of what the route sheet provided, and negligently failed to tell its driver that D.J.’s grandmother’s house was located on Lalite west of Goodfellow.”

The court overruled the company’s motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict (JNOV). The company appealed, arguing: “(1) First Student satisfied any duty it owed by dropping off D.J. in a reasonably safe location, and (2) the criminal acts of the hit-and-run driver were an intervening and superseding cause that became the new proximate cause of D.J.’s injuries.”  In reversing the lower court, the Supreme Court noted:  “[T]he dispositive issue here is whether First Student’s failure to provide Richardson with the route information was the proximate cause of D.J.’s injuries — or whether the criminal acts of the hit-and-run driver were the proximate cause of D.J.’s injuries.”  Because criminal acts, such as the hit-and-run, are rarely foreseeable, the court ruled in First Student’s favor, vacating and remanding the case and determining that D.J. failed to establish a proximate cause.