Quantcast

Biking related lawsuit (another broken neck story)

Bikerpunk241

Monkey
Sep 28, 2001
765
0
4! When you get hurt, or in this case, your kid gets hurt, it is one hundred percent the riders fault. :nope:
 

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,959
35
dream4est said:
sk6 like i said i dont even know what wintergreen but im sure they were not responsible for your injury. and since you wont even explain it i still think you are a person that would sue first and ask questions later.
i never attacked transcend. but you are a different story. anyone who posts that they considered suing after a crash without even explaining the situation scares me. it should scare everyone who rides. at least that grande kid who crashed at calabasas admits he wanted nothing to do with the suit and his dad is just a freak trying to profit off his sons misfortune (which is a horrible thing to do). anyone who mentions lawsuit after a bike crash will hear it from me. or those who assume a landowner is liable and post that online. both your comments i referred to are reflective of the attitudes that closed big bear, calabasas, gold hill, idaho spgs, sand hill, the challenge park, etc.
since you are new to the sport i know you dont understand how these beliefs will ruin mountain biking.
You assume alot, and say little.

Good luck.
 

drboudreaux

Chimp
Aug 2, 2005
16
0
mountains
I have been a browser of the forum for about a year now, but have never felt inclined to post until I read this topic. It definitely caught my attention.

I do not intend for my remarks to be inflammatory to anyone who has previously posted in this thread. However, i do hope to provide some insight into this topic.

Unfortunately, SK6 is right about a lot of the issues that have been discussed. Let me preface my comments by saying that none of my comments should be used or interpreted as legal advice, so do not use it as such. I am simply stating my opinion and understanding of the law on this topic.

Many mountain bikers would say that I have joined the dark side - a lawyer. However, let me say that I entered law school a mountain biker. I love riding. I rode too much during my first year of law school. Have I passed the bar? Not yet - but I will very soon. Do I plan on being a blood-sucking personal injury lawyer? Not a chance. As I stated above, I love mountain biking. I have been riding for 12 years now. I ride trails on public and private land, sometimes I may even trespass to ride a good trail. Have I fallen before? Yes. Have I been injured? Yes. Two weeks before I started my first year of law school, I fell off a ladder bridge about ten feet in the air and damaged a nerve in my leg. Every time I sat down, my leg fell asleep and hurt - badly. This was obviously not too conducive to the law school environment. However, I never thought to sue anyone. I was pissed at myself for not paying attention on a stunt I had cleaned many times before. However, some people would have sued. And that sucks.

I went to law school to protect the sport that I love. Unfortunately, this means occasionally thinking like the other side. And this means figuring out how to impose liability on a land owner.

Without going into details of how to beat the system, let me just say that there are ways to do it, unfortunately. A good attorney can find his way around waivers, assumption of risk, etc. However, I will not go into these details in this forum, out of respect for landowners such as dream4st. In my opinion, me going into details as to how to hold someone liable DOES hurt the sport.

I am somewhat familiar with recreational use statutes and protections. These are likely the most beneficial and helpful to landowners. However, there are some hurdles to overcome regarding these statutes and their effectiveness depends on the state where the property is located.

Additionally, whether a person pays or rides for free is also important. A paying person is an "invitee" in the eyes of the law and demands a higher degree of protection from the landowner. A non-paying person is a "licensee" and requires that the landowner do nothing to intentionally harm the person who is on the property. These are very general statements that should not in any way be used as legal advice. Always consult an attorney; as was previously noted, there are always loopholes.

There are major problems confronting not just mountain bike park property owners, but anyone who owns property. (The judicial system does need to be reformed, but it is not likely to happen. If medical malpractice reform caught as much flack as it did, then property owner liability doesnt stand a chance of being reformed.) :think:

The biggest hurdle that mountain biking needs to overcome is that of a standard. The law loves standards, or measuring sticks, if you will. The law seeks an industry standard to measure the injury-producing event against. If a landowner follows the industry standard, then the chances of him being liable significantly reduce. This is the principle difference between skateparks/BMX and mountain biking. There is not yet an industry standard for the way that mountain bike parks are built and maintained. This was a problem facing skateparks when skateboarding took hold of US suburbia, but was eventually overcome as more and more cities and companies began to build skate parks. Have you ever noticed that almost all skateparks are generally the same, especially city-owned ones? This is not a coinicidence. The layouts may be different, but the angle/degree, height, pitch, etc of the ramps is almost always the same. This is because an industry standard has been developed and the parks are following that standard as a shield against liability. The same is true for BMX parks. The ABA has developed a standard for the way that these parks are constructed and maintained, and the tracks are built to this standard.

Unfortunately, there is not yet a standard that can be applied to mountain bike parks. As more and more resorts and private landowners build these parks, a standard will be generated. However, it takes patience and resolve for this standard to be developed. Unfortunately, kids and old folks get hurt and will get hurt while riding mountain bikes, regardless of whether they are on stunts or not. However, as these cases progress, they will stimulate an industry standard that can be applied. As more and more places withstand the threat of litigation and continue to operate and build stunts and trails, more and more trails will be built. Thank you Whistler, Deer Valley, Brian Head, N*, Snowshoe, Mammoth, Dream4st and all others who push our sport forwards in the face of adversity and possible liability.

SK6 is right. There is little case law on this subject, and until there is, the jury is still out as to how mountain bike parks will fare (sorry for the pun). However, there are analogous cases out there to other sports and property owners who have faced this problem and have won. The best thing that we as mountain bikers can do is to continue to support our sport and thank those who are pushing it forward. The more organized we can become, the more likely we will be recognized and standards can be created and developed. Such was true of skate parks and can be true of mountain biking.

Dream4st, I am sure that you have a competent and effective attorney working with you who will continue to fight strongly for you and be an advocate for your park. I am interested in learning more about your legal strategies and even more interested in riding in your park when it is complete. Good luck to you.

Again, the above material is is no way legal advice, so do not use it as such. It is just my 2 cents.

I hope to continue to use my legal education to further mountain biking and support the developent of our sport.

RIDE ON....
 

SK6

Turbo Monkey
Jul 10, 2001
7,586
0
Shut up and ride...
dream4est said:
sk6 like i said i dont even know what wintergreen but im sure they were not responsible for your injury. and since you wont even explain it i still think you are a person that would sue first and ask questions later.
i never attacked transcend. but you are a different story. anyone who posts that they considered suing after a crash without even explaining the situation scares me. it should scare everyone who rides. at least that grande kid who crashed at calabasas admits he wanted nothing to do with the suit and his dad is just a freak trying to profit off his sons misfortune (which is a horrible thing to do). anyone who mentions lawsuit after a bike crash will hear it from me. or those who assume a landowner is liable and post that online. both your comments i referred to are reflective of the attitudes that closed big bear, calabasas, gold hill, idaho spgs, sand hill, the challenge park, etc.
since you are new to the sport i know you dont understand how these beliefs will ruin mountain biking.
To set the record straight, I have been riding for 5 years. I have been gone for a little over a year and a half. Sorry I’m not the proficient Whistler Park extraordinaire like you. My statements of the legal system and the possible outcomes, while they may piss you off, are what it is. Again, if you want to change it, call your congressman. Attacking me will not solve your problem.

And to be perfectly honest, what happened to me is none of your damn business. MANY here know what had occurred, my part in it etc...etc...etc….

Someone ready to sit for the bar, as drboudreaux is (Good luck BTW!!)has a vast understanding of the THEORY and application in these particular fact scenarios. Sorry you didn't like the answer.

Lastly, I guess you meager attempt at attacking me personally indicates your rash and harsh reactions to serious discussions. Any further comment I have for is referenced in my last post.

Regards,

SK6
 

mountaingoat

Monkey
Nov 22, 2003
220
0
Hell Paso Texas
All this talk about crap.. Everyone must DIE someday.. Why the hell cant people see that.. The laws and all this legal crap sux.. I am gonna die someday too and I am gona ride as hard as I can.. I build trails and have a park.. I tell people YOU COULD DIE OR BE SERIOSLY MAIMED(sounds like fun)They usually take the warning, maybe thats why no one comes and rides w/us.. Our trails are sick.. I wish people would take responsibility for their own actions(or actions of their kids), they bought him the bike that he supposedly broke his neck on , or did he steal it.. Maybe the landowner should sue the parents for being dumbasses and buying their kid a bike(obviosly doesnt know how to drop 15ft.).. :stupid:
WTF.. This is just my opinion.. Good luck on recovery too the kid, but take the damn bike away from him .. Stupid people suck.. :angry: Hell Paso is full of them.. Half my family cant even take responsibility for themselves, bastards.. I am gonna go ride now.. and maybe break my neck.. Lawyers just plain SUCK!! Just the fact that they are there makes me sick.. This wouldnt happen in New Zealand , you cant sue.. :evil:
 

Motionboy2

Calendar Dominator
Apr 23, 2002
1,800
0
Broomfield, Colorado
dream4est said:
man you need a reality check. the reason we have problems with liability is because of people like you. you broke a rib and thought about going to court? and you first post included this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirknight6

That being said, the landowner, is in all likelihood liable for the injury.

that shows me that you feel that your injury was wintergreens fault. i dont even know what wintergreen is but i am 100% sure you were at fault. people like you who always want to blame others make me sick. look into the mirror. thats whose responsible when you get on a bike and ride. i for one will never allow anyone with your ideology to ever ride on my property or with me at the resorts. i crashed at keystone two weeks ago. so they are at fault? for my stupid move? friggin lawyer types are so annoying. they always look for an angle when something goes wrong. anyone who reads the first post by sk6 should consider his above wintergreen comment too. i totally stand by my statement that he is hurting our sport. like 200% now.

To make sure I read SK6's comments correctly.. Didn't I read that he had an opportunity to sue and choose not to because he didn't want to hurt the sport?

I could say the same thing. I crashed at a riding spot, my insurance company came to me and told me they wanted to recoupe expenses on my initial bill of 15k. I told them "I am an idiot. I was trying to do something that it is now apparent that I can't do." Had I not taken responsibility and blamed the location then my insurance company would be in a legal debate right now, probably settling for thousands more than this ever cost them.
 

dream4est

Monkey
Jan 28, 2003
180
0
well as long as a private landowner does not charge a fee for use of his property, and he is not guily of malicous intent, he is not liable for anyones inujury/suffering. thats about as plain jane as i can make it (and obviously i cannot divulge any more legal strategy dr. bour. anyone who asks questions about that/liability/insurance will not be allowed on my property as per my attorneys advice). landowners are protected under the law just like land users. as much as you guys like to debate stuff mentioning the negative aspects of this topic is bad for mtbing. it plants a seed so to speak.
would you go to a skatepark and ask them their legal strategies and how they relate to injury/liability/etc? no. so i would suggest not doing it on anyones private property. a landowner who thinks that a guest is prying for info regarding liability/legalities would be out of their minds to let that nosey-type individual recreate on their land. i hope people here get my point.
 

H8R

Cranky Pants
Nov 10, 2004
13,959
35
Thank you for visiting Beatthehorsetodeaththenbeatitsomemoreville.

Hope you enjoyed your stay.
 

BKQuill

Turbo Monkey
Dec 19, 2004
1,016
0
Rangers Lead the Way
H8R said:
This whole thread was so boring and it hurt my eyes to read it.

I'm gonna sue all of you.

:dead:
I'm with ya, so let's get together and start a class action suit.

I have never seen so many $hithouse/wannabe lawyer's in one spot before!!
This thread is like a train wreck, it's terrible but I'm somehow drawn into.
 

deweydude

Monkey
Mar 23, 2005
418
1
Washougal Washington
first off don't get me wrong I am a mountain biker and love the extreme stuff.
I am not a Lawyer or a paralegal and I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
We have several local places where this same kind of activity takes place :thumb:

That being said, any private land owner that wants to allow this kind of activity on his property can not afford to simply take a blind eye to the situation thats just asking for trouble and is pretty damn stupid :nope:

The property needs to be CLEARLY posted stateing that a legality waiver must be signed before riding on said property and property is posted NO TRESPASSING unless proper documentation has been completed.
That way the land owner is protected in case of an accident that will happen any time this kind of extreme activity takes place

I hope the rider is ok and everything works out for the land owner and anyone that enjoys this property that is sadly going to loose out due to this unfortunate situation
 

Slacker

Monkey
Jul 24, 2002
228
0
Los Angeles
Motionboy2 said:
I could say the same thing. I crashed at a riding spot, my insurance company came to me and told me they wanted to recoupe expenses on my initial bill of 15k. I told them "I am an idiot. I was trying to do something that it is now apparent that I can't do." Had I not taken responsibility and blamed the location then my insurance company would be in a legal debate right now, probably settling for thousands more than this ever cost them.

What you did is commendable, but perhaps, even more so if you would’ve dropped your insurance co. for one that actually owns a conscience.
 

Logchucker

Chimp
Sep 1, 2005
9
0
I'm going to bring up the point a lot of these suits are pushed by the insurance companies, for the families, so they don't have to pay
 

SK6

Turbo Monkey
Jul 10, 2001
7,586
0
Shut up and ride...
Logchucker said:
I'm going to bring up the point a lot of these suits are pushed by the insurance companies, for the families, so they don't have to pay
This is a tough debate, and many people only go with the generic response and play armchair lawyer. However, tort law is what it is and involves quite of bit of holding people accountable.

If accountability becomes and issue for someone, then don't allow, or build yourself on private land, ANYTHING that could cause harm.

Personally, most people think about intentional torts as opposed to the issue that is occurring here.

We, in the United States have a duty that arises out of a legal obligation that results from relationships with other.

Tort law and negligence is a subject that needs to be learned and researched before shooting off ones mouth, as is easy to do, for example the McDonalds coffee lady.

Yup, your right on the money, the insurence companies are going to recoup their cost. It is as it is....res ipsa loquitor.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
23
SF, CA
Haven't read this whole thread, but there's a lot of hate flowing, so I figured I'd throw out some perspective.

Having been on the recieving end of this type of lawsuit, I can still say that there are good reasons that the family might sue. In our case, the injured party was truly responsible for his own actions, and of adult age at that. Unfortunately, his injury resulted in massive brain damage, chronic pain necessitating nearly 24 hours of nursing care, and a host of other medical needs. When the insurance money ran out (he was no longer terminal, just in constant pain), his family was faced with an option. We can suck it up and watch our son suffer, or we can try to sue and hope that we get enough to care for him. I was part of the organization that was sued... while obviously I disagreed that we were at all responsible, I have a hard time thinking that they should "suck it up."

So what I'm saying is, the land-owner doesn't deserve to be sued, and did nothing wrong in my opinion, but at the same time if the family involved does sue, it doesn't mean they're evil or opportunistic for trying to care for their child. It means they're stuck between a rock and a hard place. If it were your son, and you had to watch him writhe in near-constant pain, what would you do?