Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
Twelve-year-old P was injured while skateboarding at a facility operated by D. On a prior visit, P's mother had executed a release on P's behalf, which was required in order for P to enter the skate park. The release contained a clause agreeing to submit any claims to arbitration, as well as a waiver of the right to seek damages if injured by D’s negligence. P suffered a fractured femur when an aggressive skateboarder, about whom his parents had complained to D, forced him off a skateboard ramp. P sued D for negligence in supervision, and failure to warn. D demanded commercial arbitration. P moved to enjoin the arbitration and to invalidate the pre-injury release signed by P's mother. D cross-moved for summary judgment. The trial court dismissed the complaint without prejudice and ordered arbitration. P appealed. The Appeals court unanimously affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment concerning the validity of the arbitration provision. The panel also found that because the validity of a pre-injury liability waiver presents a question of public policy, the trial court should have ruled on the waiver's validity and not referred that question to the arbitrator. The majority concluded that, under the circumstances of this matter, a parent lacks the authority 'to sign a pre-tort agreement limiting the liability of a tortfeasor to exclude negligent conduct' and therefore voided the release. D appealed on the issue of the validity of the pre-injury release of liability. P appealed the affirmation of the arbitration clause.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co