Case Brief
Morgan v. State of New York
Facts:
The claimant, Morgan, sustained severe physical injuries caused by an accident which occurred as he was driving a two person bobsled during a national championship race. Morgan was an experienced rider who had been bobsledding for over 20 years and had competed in the US Olympics. He also testified that he was familiar with this particular course and had raced on it many times prior to this race. The area where the accident occurred was recently reconstructed and substantially modified but was approved by FIBT, the regulating authority of the sport. Morgan brought a lawsuit in the Court of Claims stating that the design of the exit ramp was the cause of his accident and injuries. The defendant, State of New York, which owns and operates the mountain, stated that the athlete assumed the risks of a dangerous sport and was primarily to blame for the accident.
Procedural History:
Court of Claims ruled in favor of Morgan and ordered a trial to pay for damages. The defendant appealed and the appellate court dismissed the claim. Morgan appealed in Court of Appeals.
Holding:
Decision was affirmed. Morgan was an experienced rider who assumed the risk by participating in a dangerous sport, there was no breach of duty by the defendant.
Rational:
In assessing the decision of whether a defendant has violated a duty of care in a sport with high risks, the standard should include whether the actions of the defendant caused the conditions to be more dangerous than the usual accepted dangers of the sport. It was determined that the construction to the area did not increase the risks of an already dangerous sport. The plaintiff, a rider with over 20 years of experience assumed the inherent risks by admitting that he had participated in this race many times before and was familiar with the course. Therefore the defendant did not owe a duty of care based on the fact that the plaintiff assumed the risks by participating in a
Facts:
The claimant, Morgan, sustained severe physical injuries caused by an accident which occurred as he was driving a two person bobsled during a national championship race. Morgan was an experienced rider who had been bobsledding for over 20 years and had competed in the US Olympics. He also testified that he was familiar with this particular course and had raced on it many times prior to this race. The area where the accident occurred was recently reconstructed and substantially modified but was approved by FIBT, the regulating authority of the sport. Morgan brought a lawsuit in the Court of Claims stating that the design of the exit ramp was the cause of his accident and injuries. The defendant, State of New York, which owns and operates the mountain, stated that the athlete assumed the risks of a dangerous sport and was primarily to blame for the accident.
Procedural History:
Court of Claims ruled in favor of Morgan and ordered a trial to pay for damages. The defendant appealed and the appellate court dismissed the claim. Morgan appealed in Court of Appeals.
Holding:
Decision was affirmed. Morgan was an experienced rider who assumed the risk by participating in a dangerous sport, there was no breach of duty by the defendant.
Rational:
In assessing the decision of whether a defendant has violated a duty of care in a sport with high risks, the standard should include whether the actions of the defendant caused the conditions to be more dangerous than the usual accepted dangers of the sport. It was determined that the construction to the area did not increase the risks of an already dangerous sport. The plaintiff, a rider with over 20 years of experience assumed the inherent risks by admitting that he had participated in this race many times before and was familiar with the course. Therefore the defendant did not owe a duty of care based on the fact that the plaintiff assumed the risks by participating in a