Baseball fans assume the risk of being struck by foul balls, not hotdogs flung by a team mascot named “Sluggerrr.”
That pretty much sums up a recent ruling from the heartland.
An injured baseball fan usually has about as much chance of winning a negligence suit as my Cleveland Indians have of winning a World Series.
But the Idaho Supreme Court just gave the go ahead to the personal injury action of a spectator who lost an eye to a foul ball.
A home caregiver assumed the risk of injuries suffered in an attack by an Alzheimer’s patient, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in affirming a summary judgment.
A California home care worker suffered serious stab wounds in 2008 when an 85-year-old Alzheimer’s patient suddenly turned on her.
This week, a state court ruled that the caregiver assumed the risk of her injuries.
An amusement park customer assumed the risk of injury from head-on collisions in the course of a bumper car ride, the California Supreme Court has ruled in reversing judgment.
The assumption of the risk doctrine did not apply to bar the personal injury claim of a deliveryman who slipped and fell on black ice, Maryland’s highest court has ruled in reversing a summary judgment.
Defendants in a jail suicide case could not avoid liability by asserting contributory negligence and assumption of the risk, the Washington Supreme Court has ruled in granting a new trial.
A jury in a federal employer liability case should have been explicitly instructed that the assumption of the risk defense did not apply, Maryland’s highest court has ruled in ordering a new trial.
A plaintiff can be held to have voluntarily assumed the risk of slipping on ice or snow because she had a safe alternate course of action, a Maryland appellate court has ruled.