“She suffered beck and back strain injuries and a cracked tooth.”
so what is a beck strain?
if she signed a liability form, that meant she did not read it! she was so looking forward to getting $$$. i bet she will now turn her lawsuit to the manufacturer. i bet that won’t fly either.
I don’t see how the waiver could hold up personally. If the gym failed to keep the equipment properly maintained, I think they bear some liability. Now, if the injured person wasn;t operating the machine properly, thats a different story all together. But I’m sure we aren’t getting the whole story here.
Its just like those big dump trucks that have the “NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR BROKEN WINDSHIELDS” sign on the back. If they fail to properly secure their load, they are liability for possible damages that might arise.
Spinners are required to set their bikes handlebars and seats to accomodate their height. Perhaps she did not secure her own bike prior to her use.
Dump trucks also say KEEP BACK 50 FEET. If drivers did not want their windshields broken by falling debris, which sometimes occurs even when the load is secured, then they should read the signs on the back of the truck. Another way to pass the responsibility buck.
Yeah, but what if you get hit with debris from the dump truck because you had to get closer than 50 feet to be able to read that the sign said keep back 50 feet. A conundrum….
It’s nothing like the sign on the back of a truck. The drivers behind the truck don’t sign something stating that the truck is not liabile even if negligent. The club member signed a contract stating the club wouldn’t be liable even if the club was negligent. Unless they coerced her into signing or told her not to read it, then this case is closed.
Believe me, liability waivers do hold up, depending on what state you are in. We are insurers of high risk recreation activities. Without the waiver, we wouldn’t be able to provide the coverage. The participants are generally waiving liability as a result of simple negligence, not gross negligence. If you dont sign, you dont participate.
i have seen waivers signed for children/minors by parents and they have been renigged by a judge…apparently the judge stated that the parent did not have the right to sign a waiver for their minor…interesting that in this case, because the parent is the guardian is reponsible for the child but not allowed to sign the waiver…
It was good to see that at least one other person out of all these commenters had a sense of humor about this. It apparently went right by the rest of them.
Yea, I read an article about that on IJ not too long ago. Wasn’t it in regards to one of those large inflatible rooms that kids can bounce around in?
So, the judge said the parents didn’t have the right to sign the wavier, but the kid who is obviously a minor can’t sign a legal document and have it hold up, so what did the judge expect the company to do if the company was not negligent at all?
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
“She suffered beck and back strain injuries and a cracked tooth.”
so what is a beck strain?
if she signed a liability form, that meant she did not read it! she was so looking forward to getting $$$. i bet she will now turn her lawsuit to the manufacturer. i bet that won’t fly either.
funny, how we proof read these articles… they corrected it to neck & back strain…
I don’t see how the waiver could hold up personally. If the gym failed to keep the equipment properly maintained, I think they bear some liability. Now, if the injured person wasn;t operating the machine properly, thats a different story all together. But I’m sure we aren’t getting the whole story here.
Its just like those big dump trucks that have the “NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR BROKEN WINDSHIELDS” sign on the back. If they fail to properly secure their load, they are liability for possible damages that might arise.
Spinners are required to set their bikes handlebars and seats to accomodate their height. Perhaps she did not secure her own bike prior to her use.
Dump trucks also say KEEP BACK 50 FEET. If drivers did not want their windshields broken by falling debris, which sometimes occurs even when the load is secured, then they should read the signs on the back of the truck. Another way to pass the responsibility buck.
Yeah, but what if you get hit with debris from the dump truck because you had to get closer than 50 feet to be able to read that the sign said keep back 50 feet. A conundrum….
It’s nothing like the sign on the back of a truck. The drivers behind the truck don’t sign something stating that the truck is not liabile even if negligent. The club member signed a contract stating the club wouldn’t be liable even if the club was negligent. Unless they coerced her into signing or told her not to read it, then this case is closed.
Believe me, liability waivers do hold up, depending on what state you are in. We are insurers of high risk recreation activities. Without the waiver, we wouldn’t be able to provide the coverage. The participants are generally waiving liability as a result of simple negligence, not gross negligence. If you dont sign, you dont participate.
i have seen waivers signed for children/minors by parents and they have been renigged by a judge…apparently the judge stated that the parent did not have the right to sign a waiver for their minor…interesting that in this case, because the parent is the guardian is reponsible for the child but not allowed to sign the waiver…
It was good to see that at least one other person out of all these commenters had a sense of humor about this. It apparently went right by the rest of them.
Yea, I read an article about that on IJ not too long ago. Wasn’t it in regards to one of those large inflatible rooms that kids can bounce around in?
So, the judge said the parents didn’t have the right to sign the wavier, but the kid who is obviously a minor can’t sign a legal document and have it hold up, so what did the judge expect the company to do if the company was not negligent at all?