Re: Re: Liability Evaluation

["Kirsten Price" <splash@dakotacom.net>]

Ok, but that really is the issue.  There would almost certainly be a dispute
over an issue of fact: Did the riders act in a safe and responsible manner?
That means that the issue cannot be decided by a judge; the plaintiff has
the right to take the issue to a jury. Only juries can decide issues of
fact. In the other states' statutes, the states basically declare that
participants assume the risk of injury by participating. Therefore as a
matter of law, there can be no liability.  In those cases, a complaint of
negligence associated with an accident at an endurance ride, where all
involved were participants would likely be dismissed either through a motion
to dismiss or by a summary judgment; thus the expense of a lawsuit would be
mostly avoided.

Normally, the purpose of the Equine Liability statutes is to place
assumption of risk on participants, thus eliminating a class of incidents
(e.g. the unpredictability of equine behavior and the inherent risk of
injury associated with playing with horses) from being considered  in terms
of "negligence." The Montana statute appears to keep a good chunk of that
door open, which allows lawsuits to go forward in Montana that probably
would not go forward in other states.

I'm sure my explanation is muddy; but I definitely need the practice, so I
hope you all don't mind.

Kirsten


----- Original Message -----
From: <CMKSAGEHIL@aol.com>
To: <splash@dakotacom.net>; <Lyoness@castlenet.com>;
<Ridecamp@endurance.net>
Sent: Saturday, September 25, 1999 11:25 AM
Subject: RC: Re: Liability Evaluation


> In a message dated 9/25/99 11:16:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> splash@dakotacom.net writes:
>
> << So, if a plaintiff could convince a jury that a reasonable endurance
rider
>  would have acted differently (e.g. pulled their horses up because they
did
>  not have a good view of what was coming up) under the same circumstances,
>  there may be negligence and therefore liability.  >>
>
> I imagine that one could line up ample witnesses on both sides of THAT
> problem, still making it not a very cut-and-dried case for negligence...
>
> Heidi
>
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
>


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.    
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/RideCamp   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=