« Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit posts 5 today, one is from Indiana | Main | Ind. Decisions - 7th Circuit posts three, none Indiana-related »
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Law - New Jersey case on waiver of liability at skateboard park
The New Jersey Star-Ledger reported yesterday on an argument before the NJ Supreme Court on whether parents can waive their children's rights to sue. Some quotes:
In a case involving a 12-year-old skateboarder's broken leg, the state Supreme Court has been asked to decide whether parents can sign away their children's rights to sue.The boy is suing the commercial skateboarding park where he was hurt, even though his mother had signed a form giving up that right. * * *
The attorney for the injured boy argued that if parents can waive their children's rights, release forms will become commonplace and amusement operators will be freed of responsibility to make their rides and facilities safe. * * *
Richard Wischusen, a lawyer for the skateboarding park, said that unless commercial sporting facilities can protect themselves from lawsuits, they are "going to become too expensive and they're going to close their doors and go away." * * *
Justice Barry Albin asked whether the court should enforce releases that give operators of recreational facilities "a free pass for their own negligence."
Wischusen replied that his client was only trying to avoid lawsuits resulting from "the inherent risks of the sport."
The case tests the validity of a form that Anastasia Hojnowski signed on Dec. 26, 2002, so that her 12-year-old son, Andrew, could skateboard at Vans Skate Park in Moorestown. A week later, the boy broke his thighbone while skateboarding and had to undergo surgery twice. The family sued, claiming the park was negligent because it had failed to supervise the skating and control "aggressive skateboarders."
One provision in the form provided that if Andrew were injured, his claim would be heard by an arbitrator rather than a jury. A state appeals court upheld that.
The form also said Andrew could collect money from Vans only if it "intentionally failed" to correct a hazardous condition or unsafe equipment. The appeals court ruled 2-1 that Andrew's mother could not restrict his rights in that fashion.
Wischusen said the skate park needs that protection because it has been sued too often by skateboarders who claim they should never have been allowed to use the facility because they were inexperienced.
"We win those," Wischusen said, but only after the insurance company spends "thousands" of dollars in defense costs that drive up premiums. He said Vans Inc. sold its Moorestown skate park because it became unprofitable.
Porter argued that public safety is so important that no one, even adults, should be able to sign away their right to sue. He said the highest courts of Utah, Colorado and Washington state have ruled that parents cannot sign away their children's right to sue.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on February 1, 2006 05:08 PM
Posted to General Law Related