Preview

Case Brief

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
340 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
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

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Yunker V. Honeywell

    • 1061 Words
    • 5 Pages

    4. The court allowed for the negligent retention issue to go to trial because of some evidence found on the record, which showed a number of…

    • 1061 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Law 531 Case 5.1

    • 1237 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Rules: The case was adjudicated on the basis of negligence law. Negligence is “the omission to do something which a reasonable man would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do.” Among others, negligence law takes into consideration: duty of care, breach of duty of care, injuries caused by defendant’s negligent act(s), and the likes. (Cheeseman, 2013). A particular negligence law considered during this case was negligence per se.…

    • 1237 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Various plaintiffs sued Mitsubishi Motors Corporation after a sport utility vehicle rolled over while driven on a freeway. The trial court entered an order granting the defense a motion to disqualify plaintiff’s legal team and experts. The California Court of Appeal affirmed its decision and plaintiffs sought review.…

    • 584 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The trial court rendered judgement in favor of plaintiff against both defendants(Duplechin and Duplechin's liability insurer, Allstate Insurance Company). Both Duplechin and Allstate contend that the trial court erred: in not finding that Bourque assumed the risk of injury by participating in the softball game and was guilty of contributory negligence. Duplechin also contends that the trial court erred in negligent. Allstate further contends that the coverage under its policy which excludes injury intended or expected by the insured.…

    • 488 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Coughlin V Tailhook

    • 468 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Facts: During a convention at the Las Vegas Hilton in September 1991, Navy Lieutenant Paula Coughlin was attacked by a group of men in a hotel hallway. The resulting post-traumatic stress disorder and other problems related to the attack eventually hampered her ability to perform her duties. Ultimately, she resigned from the US Navy. Coughlin brought action against the Hilton Hotels Corporation (HCC), the Las Vegas Hilton Corporation (LVHC) and the Tailhook Association for negligence seeking both compensatory and punitive damages. “Her complaint alleged that LVHC and HHC had acted with conscious disregard for known safety standards and measures.” (Retrieved from www.ca9.uscourts.gov on December 5, 2007) The Tailhook Association settled out of court for a sum of $400,000.00.The jury found LVHC and HHC negligent and awarded Coughlin $1.7 million in compensatory damages, punitive damages of $2.62 million against LVHC, and $2.3 million against HHC. HCC and LVHC appeal.…

    • 468 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case Brief

    • 933 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Joseph Kly met Walter and Helen Pestinikas in the latter part of 1981 when Kly consulted them about prearranging his funeral. In March, 1982, Kly, who had been living with a stepson, was hospitalized and diagnosed as suffering from Zenker's diverticulum, a weakness in the walls of the esophagus, [***4] which caused him to have trouble swallowing food. In the hospital, Kly was given food which he was able to swallow and, as a result, regained some of the [**1342] weight which he had lost. When he was about to be discharged, he expressed a desire not to return to his stepson's home and sent word to appellants that he wanted to speak with them. As a consequence, arrangements were made for appellants to care for Kly in their home on Main Street in Scranton, Lackawanna County.…

    • 933 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case Brief No 1

    • 699 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Plaintiff and Defendant: The plaintiff/appellant is Harvestons Securities, Inc. The defendant/appellee is Narnia Investments, Ltd.…

    • 699 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    case brief

    • 258 Words
    • 2 Pages

    FACTS: In August of 2003 Detective Shane Blankenship, a social worker, was assigned to investigate and interview Michael Shatzer about claims that Shatzer had sexually abused his three year old son. At the time of the investigation Shatzer was incarcerated at Maryland Correctional Institution-Hagerstown for an unrelated child-sexual abuse offense. Before asking Shatzer any questions, Detective Blankenship informed Shatzer of his rights, Shatzer then obtained a written waiver of those rights. Blankenship proceeded to end the interview, release Shatzer back into the general prison population, and end the investigation. After two years and six months, Dectective Hoover reopened the investigation, interviewed Shatzer's son who was now eight years old, who could now describe the incident in more detail. In March of 2006, Hoover went to Roxbury Correctional Institute to interview Shatzer about sexually abusing his son. After approximately 30 minutes of interviewing, Shatzer agreed to take a polygraph; in which he failed. At no point during this second interview did Shatzer request to speak to a lawyer or refuse to answer Hoover's questions without a lawyer present. After incriminating himself, Shatzer was charged with second-degree sexual offense, sexual child abuse, second-degree assault and contributing to conditions rending a child in need of assistance. In court, Shatzer moved to suppress his March 2006 statements in regards to Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (1981). The trail court denied his motion. The Court of Criminal Appeals of Maryland reversed the trail courts decision stating that release of Shatzer back into the general prison population did not constitute a break in custody.…

    • 258 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Case Brief

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages

    On the evening of January 5, 1993, Tracie Reeves and Molly Coffman, both twelve years of age and students at West Carroll Middle School, spoke on the telephone and decided to kill their homeroom teacher, Janice Geiger. They agreed that Coffman would bring rat poison to school the following days so that it could be placed in Geiger 's drink. After that , they would steal Geiger 's car and drive to the Smoky Mountains. On the morning of January 6, Coffman placed a packet of rat poison in her purse and board the school bus. Coffman told another student, Christy Hernandez, of the plan and show her the poison. Hernandez went and informed her homeroom teacher, Sherry Cockrill. Cockrill then informed the school principal, Claudia Argo. When Geiger entered her classroom that morning, she observed Reeves and Coffman leaning over her deck; and when the girls noticed her, they giggled and ran back to their seats. Geiger saw a purse lying next to her coffee cup on the top of the desk. Shortly after Argo called Coffman to the principal 's office, rat poison was found in Coffman 's purse. Both Reeves and Coffman gave written statement to the Sheriff investigator concerning their plan to poison Geiger and steal her car.…

    • 1199 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Case Brief

    • 7225 Words
    • 24 Pages

    Combined Source: Company Profiles and Directories;US Law Reviews and Journals, Combined;Federal & State Court Cases - After 1944, Combined;Newspaper Stories, Combined Papers…

    • 7225 Words
    • 24 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    CASE Brief

    • 978 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Prior restrictions had been placed on Rodman’s conduct due to personal problems adversely impacting upon her place of work.…

    • 978 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Case Brief

    • 607 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Plaintiffs argues recovery under the “reasonably Foreseeability” test, which would allow a Plaintiff outside the “Zone of Danger” to recover, which was adopted in Sinn v. Burd, 486 Pa. 146 (1979). The Court stated in response that the Plaintiff’s flexible interpretation of the “jurisprudential concept …which require[s] that the defendant’s breach of a duty of care proximately causes plaintiff’s injury,” was flawed. Moreover, that “at some point along the causal chain, the passage of time and the span of distance mandate a cut-off point for liability.” Id.…

    • 607 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In December 2010, the Court of Appeals issued a ruling in favor of M’s appeal and reversed the lower court’s ruling on the matter. This meant that the Court of Appeals overturned the jury verdict and the $18.5 million judgment against M.…

    • 337 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Case Brief

    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Photosynthesis first must be determined by plotting O2 evolution vs time at different light levels. The rates calculated from each O2 evolution curve are then plotted against light level. [ For example, the figure below shows O2 evolution curves when photosynthesis was allowed to occur in the presence of two different light…

    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Held. The trial court erred in granting defendant judgment on the pleadings because the plaintiff’s complaint states a cause of action for breach of an express contract, and can be amended to state a cause of action independent of allegations of express contract.…

    • 600 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays