If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Kitsap Sun)   Participants in a mud run who were injured at the obstacle known as "Gravity's Revenge" are angry that it was correctly named (w/pic)   (kitsapsun.com) divider line 118
    More: Strange, Silverdale, Habitat for Humanity, St. Vincent de Paul, Bremerton, human foot, gravity  
•       •       •

17563 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Jan 2013 at 8:02 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



118 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-09 09:17:54 AM

mekkab: /I hope they win the suit, it sounds like a strong case, even from the article (which are usually written to muckraking standards)


Why?

Common sense is going to tell you that going down a mud slid into a creek/river there is achance you get hurt.
 
2013-01-09 09:19:14 AM

AnubisMan: deanis: I don't understand these obstacle course races. Is it that much fun being covered in mud, electrically shocked, AND completely exhausted?

Maybe for some people I guess. I don't understand the appeal of marathons either, who the hell wants to run 26 farking miles?


Especially in a race that commemorates an ancient Greek who after arriving at his destination promptly died.
 
2013-01-09 09:21:21 AM
There was a f*cking rope there to use if you didn't want to go down the slide. The slide took less effort, of course, so people took it because they were tired since it was at the end of the course. Quit clogging the courts with this crap!
 
2013-01-09 09:22:45 AM

Carn: Especially in a race that commemorates an ancient Greek who after arriving at his destination promptly died.


Not until after he fulfilled his promotional obligations to Phil Knight.
 
2013-01-09 09:23:31 AM

doubled99: bacongood
2013-01-09 08:53:25 AM

I honestly don't know who to root for on this one...

I don't want to root for the idiots who hurt themselves and sue over it, but I don't want to root for people who just copied someone else's idea and probably charged $100+ plus for a race that involved zero street closures.

I am not a fan of mud runs in general, but I spread that blame equally to the people in them and the people who organize them.

It is a real tough call.

WHY?!?

It's a voluntary activity, one that even without a long slippery hill has many chances of getting hurt. You're running through mud.
I hope they lose the suit, and furthermore, I hope it really hurts


Because the people organizing the event likely have no idea how to organize the event. A poorly organized 5k is one thing - i've been in one and it sucks but really isn't dangerous (aside from a car trying to pass the runners because the roads weren't closed properly). A poorly organized mud run would be incredibly dangerous. From the description of the obstacle it was a slip and slide directly into rocks. That is just stupid. I'm not saying you need to put pillows down there, but rocks? That isn't testing your limits, that it testing your bone density.

From what I have heard, the big runs (tough mudder, rogue race, the viking one) are pretty well organized. They challenge you but have safety procedures in place.

I looked it up, this race was charging $55 for a 5k mud run. Mud runs are generally more expensive because they have higher insurance rates. I would not be shocked if these people just charged that price because that is what other races cost but then skimped on the insurance.
 
2013-01-09 09:28:27 AM
I have a buddy I grew up with who does these things. When we were in high school and he would say how stupid people were for joining the military because the commercials showed the soldiers running through the mud.

/I joined up, he didnt
//I got paid to run through the mud
///He pays to run through mud and has a trick knee now because of it.
////CSlashiesB
 
2013-01-09 09:29:57 AM
I fought the law and the law won?

What I don't understand is what gravity wants revenge for in the first place. No one has ever broken its law and lived to tell the tale.
 
2013-01-09 09:31:49 AM
Richard Bachman approves of course.


/not obscure. Not here on Fark.
 
2013-01-09 09:35:29 AM

Resident Muslim: Richard Bachman approves of course.


/not obscure. Not here on Fark.


Also, Bachman would have explained how to properly sign that waiver.

/great, now I'm quoting myself
//hold on

*)

///ok.
 
2013-01-09 09:37:43 AM
The participants signed a "waiver." So is that supposed to absolve the event organizers from any and all responsibility? If they knew an obstacle was causing injuries due to poor design but allowed it to continue anyway they could be found culpable if the injuries exceeded the scope of the waiver.

Apparently there are a lot of fatties farkers here who can't understand why people would want to compete in these events but that doesn't mean the participants shouldn't expect reasonable safety measures to be put in place, waiver or not.
 
2013-01-09 09:46:06 AM

SlothB77: deanis: I don't understand these obstacle course races. Is it that much fun being covered in mud, electrically shocked, AND completely exhausted?

the problem i have is the mud race near me always takes place when the water is still farking cold.  When it is august and 100 out, running through water and mud is a great way to cool off.  but in farking april when the water is like 45 degrees?  fark no.

Also, not only do you pay $100 to do the race and shower outside with hundreds of other smelly people, you are also basically throwing away an entire outfit.  Whatever you wear for one of these mud runs - from your shirt to your shoes - is getting thrown away.  So if you have a pair of shoes you are getting rid of anyway, go for it.


I've never had to throw away an outfit - just hose it off when I got home and wash it a few times. Moreover, the post race co-ed hosing off is basically porn, at least on a hot day (which I gather has not been working out in your favor, which is too bad).

I've seen people pick up injuries on courses, and it's usually been either just bad luck, or going way too fast for conditions. As others have mentioned, just because the organizers built an obstacle doesn't mean it's a great idea for me in particuler. I've never done the Tough Mudder specifically because the idea of unavoidable electric shocks completely ruins it for me - but that decision is my responsibility.

It will be an issue for the next couple of years since these events are becoming so popular, and people are finding out that there is an unlimited pool of twenty-somethings that will pay $100 to run around in their underpants and hook up with other twenty-somethings afterwards. Nothing wrong with that, but observationally there is a real learning curve when it comes to organizing a successful event, and as a consumer it isn't always easy to tell the good from the bad.
 
2013-01-09 09:47:29 AM

SlothB77: KoRnBoY69: Maybe you shouldn't be doing rugged obstacle courses if it could effect(n) your job. That is just being irresponsible.

/This is why we can't have nice things
//Tort reform (am I doing it right?)

police officers are running the race to try to stay physically fit?  There is a potential for injury from performing almost any exercise.


I'm not sure how her hurting herself... let's even claim it's as bad as breaking a leg... would impact her ability to sit in a police cruiser and eat donuts...
 
2013-01-09 09:47:50 AM

liam76: mekkab: /I hope they win the suit, it sounds like a strong case, even from the article (which are usually written to muckraking standards)

Why?

Common sense is going to tell you that going down a mud slid into a creek/river there is achance you get hurt.


Because common sense is going to tell you that going down a mud slide into a creek/river there is a chance you get hurt -- so if you tell someone they have to do it, there's a good chance you're going to be liable for your gross negligence.
 
2013-01-09 09:48:02 AM
I did the Warrior Dash back in September. The course in the article seems much more difficult.
 
2013-01-09 09:52:02 AM
FTFA:

"A thick white mooring line was provided for participants to use if they wanted to climb down the slope instead of slide, but there is dispute over whether participants were made aware of the option to use the rope by the volunteers stationed at the obstacle. Volunteers were in charge of directing participants through the obstacles."

Also FTFA:

media.kitsapsun.com

Can anyone else see the rope? I see the rope. It's big, and right there.
 
2013-01-09 09:52:10 AM

deanis: I don't understand these obstacle course races. Is it that much fun being covered in mud, electrically shocked, AND completely exhausted?


I did an event last year that featured a giant inflatable slide, at the bottom of which was a giant slip and slide which ran down a ski slope into a pool of water.

So yes, it's that much fun. It's just a big playground for grown ups.
 
2013-01-09 09:52:18 AM
bacongood

doubled99: bacongood
2013-01-09 08:53:25 AM

I honestly don't know who to root for on this one...

I don't want to root for the idiots who hurt themselves and sue over it, but I don't want to root for people who just copied someone else's idea and probably charged $100+ plus for a race that involved zero street closures.

I am not a fan of mud runs in general, but I spread that blame equally to the people in them and the people who organize them.

It is a real tough call.

WHY?!?

It's a voluntary activity, one that even without a long slippery hill has many chances of getting hurt. You're running through mud.
I hope they lose the suit, and furthermore, I hope it really hurts

Because the people organizing the event likely have no idea how to organize the event. A poorly organized 5k is one thing - i've been in one and it sucks but really isn't dangerous (aside from a car trying to pass the runners because the roads weren't closed properly). A poorly organized mud run would be incredibly dangerous. From the description of the obstacle it was a slip and slide directly into rocks. That is just stupid. I'm not saying you need to put pillows down there, but rocks? That isn't testing your limits, that it testing your bone density.

From what I have heard, the big runs (tough mudder, rogue race, the viking one) are pretty well organized. They challenge you but have safety procedures in place.

I looked it up, this race was charging $55 for a 5k mud run. Mud runs are generally more expensive because they have higher insurance rates. I would not be shocked if these people just charged that price because that is what other races cost but then skimped on the insurance.


I can see "poorly organized" being a pain, but I can't see how anyone could possibly make a completely "safe" course for this type of activity. These same injuries could reasonably happen on a jogging trail if it was wet. This is a mud run through the woods. Any intelligent person can see the risk of injury.

Bottom line-some activities are dangerous. Why must it always be someone else's responsibility when you get hurt?
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-01-09 10:07:47 AM
"Instead, due to the steep pitch and long run, participants' descent was abruptly stopped when the participant impacted the rocks at the bottom of the obstacle."

This is why the best sledding hills get shut down. Lawyers.
 
2013-01-09 10:09:36 AM

AnubisMan: deanis: I don't understand these obstacle course races. Is it that much fun being covered in mud, electrically shocked, AND completely exhausted?

Maybe for some people I guess. I don't understand the appeal of marathons either, who the hell wants to run 26 farking miles?


Me. I'm a fatass, so running/walking a marathon would be a huge achievement (did my first half-marathon last fall). And because I do these kinds of things with Team in Training, I'm also raising money for leukemia research. But these types of events aren't on my radar--yet.
 
2013-01-09 10:10:24 AM
Any farkers remember action park? That place tested the limits of injury waivers daily. Fun place though. It was the waterpark of death. I was lucky enough to go there when I was 12-15. Now I spend days wishing I could find something just as dangerous/fun. I am going to do a warrior dash this summer. I hope it brings back the same feelings.
 
2013-01-09 10:12:07 AM

doubled99: I can see "poorly organized" being a pain, but I can't see how anyone could possibly make a completely "safe" course for this type of activity. These same injuries could reasonably happen on a jogging trail if it was wet. This is a mud run through the woods.Any intelligent person can see the risk of injury.

Bottom line-some activities are dangerous. Why must it always be someone else's responsibility when you get hurt?


Now you are getting into the legal arguments; which if you want to go read up on the relevant tort issues - be my guest, but there are plenty of sound reasons to blame others even if you are aware/partially to blame yourself.

I was just focusing on the general "who to root for" - the idiots who got hurt and want to sue or the idiots who probably got in way over their head in organizing the race while just trying to cash in on a fad. Personally, not a fan of either group.
 
2013-01-09 10:18:17 AM

SlothB77: if everybody is sliding down this slope and crashing into the rocks and fracturing their feet, then maybe they have a case.  It is one thing if it is a flukey injury or a scratch, but if everybody is getting hurt and medics have to shut the obstacle down in the middle of the race, then maybe they just designed it wrong.


This, but replace "everybody" with "many".
 
2013-01-09 10:29:49 AM

wruley: Bottom line: Non athletes show up to participate in an event designed for real athletes. Sue because the event was too difficult for them and they got hurt.

Never mind that they were warned and given easier options, like going around or use the rope.

The older I get, the more disgusted I get about the stupidity and audacity of people in this country.

I hope they get nothing but ridicule.


FTFA: "A thick white mooring line was provided for participants to use if they wanted to climb down the slope instead of slide, but there is dispute over whether participants were made aware of the option to use the rope by the volunteers stationed at the obstacle. Volunteers were in charge of directing participants through the obstacles."

The older you get, the harder reading comprehension becomes?
 
2013-01-09 10:36:03 AM
Looks like they weren't tough enough for the tough mudder.

/idiots.
 
2013-01-09 10:43:45 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: Looks like they weren't tough enough for the tough mudder.

/idiots.


It is because they were idiots - I watched a man in his 70's finish the toughest event I'd ever run. Sure, it took him all day, but he managed it because he was smart about it.

Lots of obstacles require a bit of forethought to figure out how you particularly are going to navigate them safely - which may be different than the way the person ahead of you does it. Hell, one of the main draws of some of these events is that you have to cooperate, often with complete strangers.

On one of the races I ran in October (in Chicago - too cold to be swimming outdoors, won't be doing it again) had a spot where the trail sloped down and abruptly turned. At the bottom of the slope there was a barbed wire fence. So instead of just sliding down the hill into the wire, we human-chained down.

Not a coordinated effort among people who had trained together, just strangers accomplishing something in a reasonable way to get everyone through. The same thing happens at the high climbing walls that are a staple of mud-runs - you get to the wall, give somebody a leg up, then the person behind you gives you a leg up. Not because it's a 'rule', but because everyone uses their heads.

My point is just that the course is 'safe' in that the actual equipment isn't falling down when you try to navigate it, but not 'safe' in that it's been child-proofed so much that you couldn't hurt yourself if you tried.
 
2013-01-09 10:44:11 AM

TiiiMMMaHHH: FTFA:

"A thick white mooring line was provided for participants to use if they wanted to climb down the slope instead of slide, but there is dispute over whether participants were made aware of the option to use the rope by the volunteers stationed at the obstacle. Volunteers were in charge of directing participants through the obstacles."

Also FTFA:

[media.kitsapsun.com image 607x450]

Can anyone else see the rope? I see the rope. It's big, and right there.


Can you see that this is the bottom of the obstacle and that, by the time you get there, it's too late to use the rope? What does the scene look like at the top where you have to decide "should I take the slide or use the rope?" And do you hear what the volunteers are telling every participant at the top?
 
2013-01-09 10:54:26 AM

TiiiMMMaHHH: FTFA:

"A thick white mooring line was provided for participants to use if they wanted to climb down the slope instead of slide, but there is dispute over whether participants were made aware of the option to use the rope by the volunteers stationed at the obstacle. Volunteers were in charge of directing participants through the obstacles."

Also FTFA:

[media.kitsapsun.com image 607x450]

Can anyone else see the rope? I see the rope. It's big, and right there.


What I can't see are rocks at the bottom. Unless they buried them in the mud, which would be a jerk move. Embellishing like that makes it sound like they're hoping for a settlement.
 
2013-01-09 11:00:45 AM

doubled99: It's a voluntary activity, one that even without a long slippery hill has many chances of getting hurt. You're running through mud.
I hope they lose the suit, and furthermore, I hope it really hurts


Ahahahahahahaha! Nice.

Why would anyone be on the side of the suers? They are on the wrong side of common sense on this one. This was not a ball pit at McDonalds, it was an obstacle course through the woods. You should expect to get a little hurt. If I had an obstacle course that included jumping off the Brooklyn Bridge and all your friends did it...

Much of our (ok, maybe just my, but I know a lot of you agree) biatching about lawyers and abuses of the legal system would go away if people just didn't sue for stuff like this. If they are being forced by their insurance company or something like that, that's a different issue, but not everyone is in every circumstance so we all have to just suck it up a little bit and be adults.
 
2013-01-09 11:00:59 AM

deanis: I don't understand these obstacle course races. Is it that much fun being covered in mud, electrically shocked, AND completely exhausted?


I have done the Tough Mudder twice.. and do enjoy other lesser-known obstacle courses as well... so yeah, I love these things.
Bonus- a LOT LOT LOT of hot girsl.. in great shape.. in tight clothing. Lots of drinking, partying, meeting people before and after.. awesome stuff.

I think there's a pic of me on the Tough Mudder course in my profile as well.
 
2013-01-09 11:01:57 AM
www.usatunes.com

Don't tell her, but the camera just zoomed in on her mommybags and she doesn't even know it!
 
2013-01-09 11:02:41 AM

doubled99: Bottom line-some activities are dangerous. Why must it always be someone else's responsibility when you get hurt?


That's not always the case. Sometimes, people do accept responsibility for their own mistakes (which never makes the news, but probably should). In this case, if the organizers made mistakes in setting up and staffing the course, sometimes a judge has to decide who's responsible for any injuries that happen due to those mistakes.
 
2013-01-09 11:05:14 AM

NutWrench: "You win again, gravity!"


"Gravity is a harsh mistress:

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-01-09 11:05:56 AM

bacongood: doubled99: I can see "poorly organized" being a pain, but I can't see how anyone could possibly make a completely "safe" course for this type of activity. These same injuries could reasonably happen on a jogging trail if it was wet. This is a mud run through the woods.Any intelligent person can see the risk of injury.

Bottom line-some activities are dangerous. Why must it always be someone else's responsibility when you get hurt?


Now you are getting into the legal arguments; which if you want to go read up on the relevant tort issues - be my guest, but there are plenty of sound reasons to blame others even if you are aware/partially to blame yourself.

I was just focusing on the general "who to root for" - the idiots who got hurt and want to sue or the idiots who probably got in way over their head in organizing the race while just trying to cash in on a fad. Personally, not a fan of either group.


Yeah, it's definitely a toss-up. But idiots should be able to sue other idiots to find out who's the bigger, more responsible idiot.
 
2013-01-09 11:08:06 AM

Quantumbunny: SlothB77: KoRnBoY69: Maybe you shouldn't be doing rugged obstacle courses if it could effect(n) your job. That is just being irresponsible.

/This is why we can't have nice things
//Tort reform (am I doing it right?)

police officers are running the race to try to stay physically fit?  There is a potential for injury from performing almost any exercise.

I'm not sure how her hurting herself... let's even claim it's as bad as breaking a leg... would impact her ability to sit in a police cruiser and eat donuts...


If its not a drive through donut shop she would have to hobble her way from the cruiser to the shop and back-pain and suffering
 
2013-01-09 11:10:58 AM

abhorrent1: dittybopper: If I have a heart attack or slip and injure myself, should I sue?

Of course you should. It's the American way.


American lesbians are particularly litigious
 
2013-01-09 11:13:01 AM
FTFA: The lawsuit was filed against Royal Valley Farm, owned by Ron and Nadean Ross who volunteered their property for the course;

This is why we can't have nice things.

/fark you, you litigous asshats
 
2013-01-09 11:14:32 AM
I did the Spartan Race last year (actually the Super Spartan, the 8 mile version). What a mismanaged, unsafe POS of a race.

The safety procedures in place were horrendously inadequate. The biggest issue was the lack of course monitors. Climbing up that cargo net? Where's the person with the walkie-talkie watching things in case someone falls? One monitor for the complete stretch of steep, bare-rock mountain face where people were dizzy and suffering from dehydration. I saw (more like heard) one guy pass out, take a nasty fall, and it took quite a while for any monitors to notice him even with his friends shouting. Good thing his friends and random people were taking care of him. All the ambulance crews were at the bottom of the mountain instead of spaced along the course.

And talking about heat exhaustion and dehydration... First they mention, surprise surprise, the 8 miles we expected was now 11 or so miles (okay). I had plenty of energy gels... even gave one away to a guy who was suffering from exhaustion. 11 miles of mountain terrain, and only 4 water stops. That's horribly negligent, putting them in danger due to dehydration. Simply not enough support for the racers. Of course, they suggest you 'bring something along with you,' but water bottles do not fare well when wading through mud or crawling along ropes.

When the race was completed (hooray.), I got my medal and was greeted by a little bottle of coconut water and a banana. No end-of race refueling? Okay, maybe if I wanted to spend money on an overpriced, greasy bratwurst. I'm used to the snack feasts at the end of marathons and even 5-Ks. The Spartan Race organization is disgraceful.

/Never doing the Spartan Race again
//I've heard the Tough Mudder is the race to do, well run and all that.
 
2013-01-09 11:17:55 AM

Jim.Casy: Albert911emt: In the context of this lawsuit, I think the english language version of "unreasonably dangerous" is "I lost and I'm a big baby so I need to punish somebody for my inadequacies."

Why did this have to be a lawsuit by 3 women? WHY?!

Also, I've run these things, and the waivers they make you sign are pretty clear. They say "You are the one volunteering to do this stupid thing, if you get hurt it's your own dumb fault so you cant sue us. Ever." Honestly, if they felt the obstacle was unsafe they could have simply not done it. Nobody forced them to, implicitly or explicitly.


I agree. Further evidence women shouldn't be running or walking all that fast. If God wanted women to participate in sports, he'd have made them men.
 
2013-01-09 11:20:15 AM

jigoro: TiiiMMMaHHH: FTFA:

"A thick white mooring line was provided for participants to use if they wanted to climb down the slope instead of slide, but there is dispute over whether participants were made aware of the option to use the rope by the volunteers stationed at the obstacle. Volunteers were in charge of directing participants through the obstacles."

Also FTFA:

[media.kitsapsun.com image 607x450]

Can anyone else see the rope? I see the rope. It's big, and right there.

What I can't see are rocks at the bottom. Unless they buried them in the mud, which would be a jerk move. Embellishing like that makes it sound like they're hoping for a settlement.


They're on the left side of the mud puddle that woman is falling into. They aren't boulders, but apparently, they don't absorb impact very well and can break your ankle if you land on them hard enough.
 
2013-01-09 11:20:26 AM
Montezuma's Revenge?
media.kitsapsun.com
 
2013-01-09 11:23:40 AM

Buck Henderson: doubled99: It's a voluntary activity, one that even without a long slippery hill has many chances of getting hurt. You're running through mud.
I hope they lose the suit, and furthermore, I hope it really hurts

Ahahahahahahaha! Nice.

Why would anyone be on the side of the suers? They are on the wrong side of common sense on this one. This was not a ball pit at McDonalds, it was an obstacle course through the woods. You should expect to get a little hurt. If I had an obstacle course that included jumping off the Brooklyn Bridge and all your friends did it...

Much of our (ok, maybe just my, but I know a lot of you agree) biatching about lawyers and abuses of the legal system would go away if people just didn't sue for stuff like this. If they are being forced by their insurance company or something like that, that's a different issue, but not everyone is in every circumstance so we all have to just suck it up a little bit and be adults.


Based on this one article, we don't know whether this is a frivolous lawsuit or one that has merit. So suck it up, be an adult and let these people settle it in court.
 
2013-01-09 11:24:00 AM

wholedamnshow: I did the Warrior Dash back in September. The course in the article seems much more difficult.


I did one back in June. Course wasn't terribly difficult. But one girl did break her leg on a mud slide obstacle. Wonder if she sued.

/Thinking about doing a marathon this year.
 
2013-01-09 11:24:48 AM
Couldn't help but notice that all of the people injured and butthurt were women. They have nobody to blame but themselves for leaving the kitchen.
 
2013-01-09 11:50:16 AM

Cerberus: I did the Spartan Race last year (actually the Super Spartan, the 8 mile version). What a mismanaged, unsafe POS of a race.


The last Tough Mudder in Colorado added on another 1.5ish miles of pure uphill running (undocumented btw).. and people were so pissed/tired/worn out that on the second day.. they re-routed the course to remove some of the added distance. It went from 10ish miles to 12.

People enjoy a challenge, sure.. but don't piss off the runners. I heard a number of people saying "yeah, we're not doing it next year if they pull this BS again" -shrug-

they did get rid of this one water obstacle that was 3 rows of barrels you had to swim under.. while treading water to each set. Problem was.. the water was dark, and there was netting under the barrels. People would get stuck/ not be seen.. etc.. VERY dangerous. So they do take into consideration some changes.
 
2013-01-09 12:18:43 PM

meanmutton: liam76: mekkab: /I hope they win the suit, it sounds like a strong case, even from the article (which are usually written to muckraking standards)

Why?

Common sense is going to tell you that going down a mud slid into a creek/river there is achance you get hurt.

Because common sense is going to tell you that going down a mud slide into a creek/river there is a chance you get hurt -- so if you tell someone they have to do it, there's a good chance you're going to be liable for your gross negligence.


There was a rope in the picture right next to it.

Even if you "had" to go down the mud slide there is nothing compelling you to go as fast as possible.
 
2013-01-09 12:19:28 PM

deanis: I don't understand these obstacle course races. Is it that much fun being covered in mud, electrically shocked, AND completely exhausted?


You didn't have much of a childhood, did you?
 
2013-01-09 12:22:29 PM

deanis: I don't understand these obstacle course races. Is it that much fun being covered in mud, electrically shocked, AND completely exhausted?


Sounds like you had a rotten childhood.
 
2013-01-09 12:25:30 PM
According to a quick Google search, as recently as 2008, Washington state (where this took place) allows an indemnitee to receive protection from the consequences of his own negligence. There are drafting concerns, namely that the intent to protect the indemnitee (the one receiving indemnity protection) from the consequences of his own negligence must be clearly and unequivocally stated (though the statement need not necessarily be "express" (i.e. use the word "negligence").

The upshot is that barring a successful allegation of gross negligence (which may or may not be allowed as a matter of public policy, i don't know, I didn't see any mention but I also didn't look for it) a properly drafted waiver/indemnity agreement (which I also haven't seen) should absolve the putative defendants of any liability to the runners.

Lawyer, but not a WA lawyer, or your lawyer for that matter.
 
2013-01-09 12:33:28 PM

deanis: I don't understand these obstacle course races. Is it that much fun being covered in mud, electrically shocked, AND completely exhausted?


You had a sheltered childhood, didn't you?
 
2013-01-09 12:37:15 PM

Fapinator: I was injured by the lack of proofreading in that article. I'm going to sue.


"The obstacle lacked any design features which slowed or regulated the rate of decent," the lawsuit states.

You are injured by topless mud running?
 
Displayed 50 of 118 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report