Mccune V. Myrtle Beach Indoor Shooting Range

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 623
  • Published : March 25, 2012
Open Document
Text Preview
The parties (Who is the plaintiff? The defendant? The appellant? The appellee?)

Christine McCune, Appellant, v. MYRTLE BEACH INDOOR SHOOTING RANGE, Defendant.

The history of the case (Who won at trial court? Who won at the lower appellate level? Who won in this decision?)

Trial court granted summary judgment to the Range on the basis of the exculpatory language in the release of liability signed by McCune. Myrtle Beach Indoor Shooting Range won at both levels.

The facts (What happened that caused the plaintiff to sue?)
During her play, the mask was loose and ill fitting which resulted in her mask being raised off her head and obstructing her view and a paintball pellet striking her in the eye and rendering her legally blind. The plaintiff's theory (Why he thinks he is right)

She thinks she is right because she tried to get another mask and was unsuccessful and resulted in a permanent injury. The defendant's theory (Why she thinks she is right)
Because the plaintiff signed a liability waiver releasing the shooting range of any fault. The legal issue (a yes or no question)
Was the plaintiff injury caused by negligence by the defendant, based on the failure of the mask to fit properly outside of the waiver signed? The holding of the court (Yes or no--answers the legal issue). No

I believe the defendant covered their end by having the plaintiff sign a waiver in case any injury were to occur and the defendant knew the mask was ill fitting, but she still went out to play paintball. She is liable for her own injuries that occurred.
tracking img