Peeps in Law Story 3: Peepers v. Tice – A Case of Multiple Peep-feasors
Peepers v. Tice – A Case of Multiple Peep-feasors
By Sylvia Seroff and Greg Broiles
The plaintiff, Peepers, was hired as a guide by defendants Tice and Peeponson for a quail-peep hunt. When Peepers advanced ahead of the defendants up a hill, a quail-peep flew just above Peeper’s head. Tice and Peeponson aimed in the direction of Peepers and shot at the quail-peep. Peepers was shot in two places – above his right peeper and on his lip.
Two different peep shot pellets caused Peeper’s injuries. It was unclear whether the two peep shot pellets came from one defendant’s shotgun, or if one pellet came from Tice and one from Peeponson.
The California Supeep Court held that in this case of multiple peep-feasors, the burden of proof shifts to Tice and Peeponson to absolve themselves, because it would be impossible for Peeper to show which of them had caused his harm. Tice and Peeperson were found to have Joint and Several Peep-ibility for Peepers’ injuries.
Inspired by the famous tort case, Summers v. Tice, 33 Cal.2d 80, 199 P.2d 1 (1948).