|
angry
Aug 3, 2005, 9:57 PM
Post #2 of 7
(1260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
Let's all sue our belayers. It's the way of the future!!
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 4, 2005, 12:26 AM
Post #3 of 7
(1260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Interesting. I'm not very good at reading legal language, so tell me if you read this the same as I do:
An Ohio court threw out the case where a guy (Matthew) was trying to sue his belayer (Erin) because she dropped him at a rock gym, and he got injured. The court ruled that because Erin didn't do it on purpose, nor was she blatantly reckless, she should not be held legally responsible. In other words, Erin made a mistake, but when Matthew roped up with her, he assumed the risk that she might make a mistake. In other words, "shit happens".
Furthermore, the appeals court agreed with the lower court, so the verdict stands. The suer (or whatever it's called) lost.
Do I have it right?
The only thing I'd be concerned with here is the definition of "reckless". Presumable the court would have found her reckless if, for example, she had snuck in without taking a safety test that was required by the rock gym, and didn't really know how to belay, despite claiming that she did. We don't really know why she dropped him. We can assume she had poor belay technique. Plenty of people do. The only thing the judgement says about her is that she blamed her error to some degree on "the smooth 'new' rope". Certainly such ropes have less friction, but that doesn't take away the fact that she screwed up a very simple function. (Let's hope Matthew didn't sue the rope manufacturer too!)
So at what point is "recklessness" assigned, legally? I have no idea. What are your thoughts on the matter, Hank?
GO
|
|
|
|
|
asandh
Aug 4, 2005, 12:54 AM
Post #4 of 7
(1260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2002
Posts: 788
|
:)
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Aug 4, 2005, 1:13 AM
Post #5 of 7
(1260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: So at what point is "recklessness" assigned, legally?
I'm no lawyer, but I'd guess a case by case basis, until precedence is established on a particular topic.
In other words, absent a clear cut law, it will be worked out as this one was; in a court room. This case will now set the precedence in (Ohio? Where ever it was) and that may or may not be useful in other states.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
hajiclimb
Aug 20, 2005, 7:19 AM
Post #6 of 7
(1260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2005
Posts: 40
|
I'm glad the judge had the good sense to throw this out. A belayer is just like any other piece of equipment and you use them at your own risk. I suspect that if the belayer was not up to the challenge of belaying in a gym, the belayer was probably new to the sport. In all of my experiences with new belayers, I was the one who trained them. If that's the case, the climber has himself to blame. This climber should read the yearly accident reports, thank his lucky stars and own up to his choice of belayer. My little finger still hurts from when my sister had too much slack in the rope at a gym in OH when I was climbing a finger crack. I guess my little sis is off the hook and I can't sue her there!!
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Aug 21, 2005, 9:51 PM
Post #7 of 7
(1260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
Interesting case, you are trying to do a favor to some one and they return and bite you back,now if this was a climbing instructor and charged for belay or climbing lesson then court will look at it differently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
