West Case Update

Firm Breached Contract, but Not Liable in Tort for Wrongful Death Claim

Description
Appeals court held that a mistake by a home alarm company was a breach of contract, but that the company could not be sued in tort for a death that was alleged to have result from the failure to respond properly to an alarm call.

Topic Contracts

Key Words
Wrongful death; Alarm Service

C A S E S U M M A R Y

Facts
Spengler had a residential services contract with ADT to install and monitor a security alarm at the home of his mother, Veronica. It included a portable call button alarm that she could activate when in distress. Due to medical problems, Veronica could not speak, so ADT had instructions to call Spengler in the event of an alarm. ADT received an alarm and dispatched an ambulance, but gave the ambulance the wrong address, which delayed their arrival by about 15 minutes. By the time the ambulance arrived, Veronica’s heart had stopped and she soon died. Spengler sued, claiming that the giving of the wrong address was misfeasance that made ADT subject to tort suit. The trial court held that Spengler’s damages were limited to the $500 limit specified in the contract and that he had no cause of action in tort. He appealed.

Decision
Affirmed. Under Michigan law, for an action in tort to arise out of a breach of contract, the act must constitute 1) a breach of duty separate and distinct from the breach of contract and 2) active negligence or misfeasance. ADT’s obligation was to dispatch emergency services and there was no independent duty beyond the contract. Beach of the contract specified a $500 limit in damages that could be claimed. That applies in this case.

Citation
Spengler v. ADT Security Services, Inc., 505 F.3d 456 (6th Cir., 2007)

Back to Contracts Listings

Firm Breached Contract, but Not Liable in Tort for Wrongful Death Claim
Description	Appeals court held that a mistake by a home alarm company was a breach of contract, but that the company could not be sued in tort for a death that was alleged to have result from the failure to respond properly to an alarm call.
Topic	Contracts
Key Words	Wrongful death; Alarm Service
C A S E S U M M A R Y
Facts	Spengler had a residential services contract with ADT to install and monitor a security alarm at the home of his mother, Veronica. It included a portable call button alarm that she could activate when in distress. Due to medical problems, Veronica could not speak, so ADT had instructions to call Spengler in the event of an alarm. ADT received an alarm and dispatched an ambulance, but gave the ambulance the wrong address, which delayed their arrival by about 15 minutes. By the time the ambulance arrived, Veronica’s heart had stopped and she soon died. Spengler sued, claiming that the giving of the wrong address was misfeasance that made ADT subject to tort suit. The trial court held that Spengler’s damages were limited to the $500 limit specified in the contract and that he had no cause of action in tort. He appealed.
Decision	Affirmed. Under Michigan law, for an action in tort to arise out of a breach of contract, the act must constitute 1) a breach of duty separate and distinct from the breach of contract and 2) active negligence or misfeasance. ADT’s obligation was to dispatch emergency services and there was no independent duty beyond the contract. Beach of the contract specified a $500 limit in damages that could be claimed. That applies in this case.
Citation	Spengler v. ADT Security Services, Inc., 505 F.3d 456 (6th Cir., 2007)