View Single Post
Old 12-11-2012, 10:15 AM   #62
Hall Of Fame
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: The Peak of Good Living
Posts: 1,504

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx View Post
Thank you for the citation. I actually read the majority opinion and dissent. Very interesting.
No problem... I'm not a lawyer but did spend some time working for an appellate judge so I appreciate the kind of reasoning that goes on here (and how tricky it can be to establish principles which govern the wide variety of possible situations).

Bottom line: I think the case is wrongly decided and the dissent is correct. I also note that the case, decided in 1999, hasn't been cited even once. Which suggests to me that it is possibly not especially persuasive authority.
Or possibly that it's an unusual case and few applicable cases have followed it.

As far as the defense's argument goes, I think it's a little reductive to say that anyone physically on the playing surface is automatically in the "zone of danger" and has thus assumed all risk. Think about the handshake example-- match is over, and I'm walking to the net to shake, opponent decides to take a practice shot and hits me. Doesn't seem like he should automatically be immune from civil liability just because we were both on a tennis court.

You originally said that people leaving the court should walk along the back curtain instead of at the net if they don't want to assume the risk of getting hit. But according to the dissent, those people would seemingly also be in the zone of danger.
Also, the majority notes:
Even if Solano could be deemed a coparticipant in Abrenica's practice serve by virtue of being on the court and having just completed a practice session with him, there is a triable issue of fact as to whether Abrenica breached the limited duty owed to coparticipants in a sporting activity to refrain from reckless conduct totally outside the range of the ordinary activity involved in the sport.
Sounds like another good reason to avoid summary judgment.

Last edited by Avles; 12-11-2012 at 10:17 AM.
Avles is offline   Reply With Quote