Find a recent sports-related court case dealing with the legal issue of negligence. After briefly summarizing the case, discuss the court’s decision. Were all the elements of negligence met? Are there any defenses you would have used? Applying what you learned in this week’s readings, do you agree with the court’s decision? Justify your answers. Rubric attached below Reply to Response below as well…. Response 1: On January 24, 2014, Makenzie Wethington (age 16), went to Robert Swainson’s (defendant) skydiving facility to learn how to skydive unaccompanied. She signed a registration form, medical statement, and an agreement, release of liability, and acknowledgement of risk form. Since she was a minor, her parents also signed the documents. Prior to the jump, she attended a four hour class. During the jump, her parachute opened, but malfunctioned, which caused her to spin rapidly towards the ground more than 3,000 feet. During the fall, someone was talking to her through a radio headset. However, the person giving her instructions had never given instructions on a radio before. The defendant was not able to jump off the plane to help the plaintiff because another skydiver got cold feet, did not jump, and it was protocol for the defendant to stay on the plane. The plaintiff was airlifted to the hospital with multiple injuries that included an injured liver and kidney, brain bleeding, a broken pelvis, lumbar spine, shoulder blade, and several ribs (Schwab, 2017). The four elements of negligence are duty, breach of duty, proximate cause, and damage. The duty owed by the skydiving busines would be to protect minors, properly guide jumpers to a safe landing via a headset radio, provide a parachute that is adequate for size, weight, and skill level, provide adequate training before a jump, select a person that has prior experience on the radio, and provide a brand new parachute, rather than a used one. That duty was breached for multiple reasons. The judge ruled that the training that the plaintiff received was inadequate, and the parachute assigned to her was too small and fast for a person that young with little experience (Schwab, 2017). The breach of duties owed directly caused the injury. The defendant’s company failed to provide adequate training, direct the plaintiff to a safe landing, and provide the plaintiff with the correct type of parachute. Finally, there was damage. Aside from the immediate damage stated earlier, the plaintiff suffers from PTSD, memory loss, panic attacks, headaches, nightmares, and frequent kidney infections (Schwab, 2017). The plaintiff was awarded $400,000 for physical pain and suffering, $350,000 for mental pain and suffering, and $100,000 for future medical expenses (Schwab, 2017). However, she did not win the negligence claim because the release of liability that both her and her parents signed protected the defendant from being sued for “losses caused by the negligence or other fault of the released party” (Wethington v. Swainson, 2015). Additionally, the acknowledgement of risk form stated, “I expressly and voluntarily acknowledge all risk of death or personal injury sustained while participating in parachuting and other aviation activities whether or not caused by the negligence or other fault of the released party, including but not limited to equipment malfunction or inadequate training” (Wethington v. Swainson, 2015). I agree with the court’s ruling. The plaintiff deserved to receive a damages settlement, but there was no way to prove that the defendant committed gross negligence. Rather, it was just ordinary negligence. However, if Makenzie’s parents did not sign the forms, I believe she would have won the negligence case because all minors also require a parent or guardian signature
Sample Solution