Originally Posted by Cindysphinx
Still, I think that as a matter of law, anyone standing on a hockey rink can expect to be hit by a puck, even if practice is over.
As a matter of law, really? Could you cite the relevant law there?
I'm pretty sure that if Bob Hockeycoach huddles the team at the center of the rink for a post-practice pep talk, and Joe Hockeyplayer decides to fire a puck into the middle of the huddle, and he injures someone, Joe Hockeyplayer could potentially be held responsible for that action. I don't think there's a "dude, you were on the rink" defense.
Now maybe this incident didn't rise to that level of malice/negligence-- but that's a question of fact, not of law, right?
Again, this was a summary judgment motion. I'm no lawyer, but as I understand it, the judge was just holding that it's conceivable that the defendant might be liable. Don't see how you can fault that based on what we know.