This is a case where Dangerfield, Inc, owns and operates a New Hampshire ski resort.
The valet parking is handled by Continental Concessions, LLC, which is Dangerfield’s sister
corporation. Both Dangerfield and Continental are subsidiaries of Sandman, Resorts, Inc. On
January 16, 2011, Sara Hartman arrives for a week stay at the ski resort. Greg Mitchell is
working as a valet parking attendant. Ms. Hartman gave her keys to Mr. Mitchell and went in
front of her car toward the ski lodge entrance. Mr. Mitchell pulled the car forward, saw Ms.
Mitchell, and tried to brake. However, his foot slipped off or brake onto the gas pedal. Ms.
Hartman was crushed between her car and the car in front of hers. When Mr. Mitchell got out to
help Ms. Hartman, he slipped on the snow and was injured. Both Ms. Hartman and Mr. Mitchell
were injured in this incident. Ms. Hartman has sued all three companies. She sued Continental
for negligence of Mr. Mitchell and independent negligence; Dangerfield for premises liability,
apparent agency and “alter ego”; and Sandman because Continental and Dangerfield were
instrumentalities. Mr. Mitchell also sued all three companies, along with Ms. Hartman. Mr.
Mitchell felt that Ms. Hartman was negligent by walking in front of the car; Sandman and
Dangerfield permitted multiple dangerous conditions to exist and his claim is based on strict
liability. He is suing Continental for his wages.
When Ms. Hartman pulled up to leave her car with valet parking, Mr. Mitchell handed
her a receipt. On the back of the receipt for the valet parking stated “The Management is Not
Responsible for Damages Incurred by Valet Parking Customers.” By leaving the vehicle with the
valet parking attendant and accepting the receipt, Ms. Hartman agrees to hold Continental
harmless of any damages caused by other customers. This claim of damage was caused by a
Continental employee, Mr. Mitchell. Many valet parking services will print a Hold Harmless
clause on the ticket or on a posted sign. Some courts say that such disclaimers are not valid if
the customer has no knowledge of them when they parked. Did Continental or Dangerfield have
signs posted?
Continental would have a difficult time in winning the negligence claim. Continental
employed Mr. Mitchell. An employer is liable for their employees’ actions during the course of
their business. Mr. Mitchell was negligent since he was the driver at the time of this incident.
Continental’s business insurance policy would cover injuries to Ms. Hartman.
Did Ms. Hartman realize she gave bailment to Continental when she pulled up to the
