A voluntary participant in a game, sport, or contest, assumes all risks incidental to the particular game, sport, or contest which are obvious and foreseeable. However, he or she does not assume an extraordinary risk which is not normally incident to the game or sport. Even where the assumption of the risk doctrine applies, defendants have a duty to use due care not to increase the risks to a participant over and above those inherent in the sport. While under the doctrine of assumption of risk, a defendant has no legal duty to eliminate or protect a plaintiff from the risks inherent in a sport, but the defendant owes a duty not to increase the inherent risks. To determine whether the primary assumption of risk doctrine applies to a sports participant, the court must decide whether the injury suffered arises from a risk inherent in the sport, and whether imposing a duty might fundamentally alter the nature of the sport.
The following form is a complaint that adopts the notice pleadings format of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which have been adopted by most states in one form or another.
Title: King Washington Complaint Against Tow Boat Operator for Injury to Water Skier for Starting Boat without Warning Introduction: In King County, Washington, a complaint has arisen against a tow boat operator due to an incident where a water skier sustained injuries when the boat was started without any warning. This complaint alleges negligence and seeks accountability for the resulting harm caused to the water skier. This detailed description will outline the key aspects of the complaint, including the potential types of complaints that fall under this category. Keywords: King Washington complaint, tow boat operator, injury to water skier, starting boat without warning, negligence. 1. Negligence Allegations: The complaint filed in King County asserts that the tow boat operator acted negligently by starting the boat without providing any warning to the water skier. It alleges that this lack of warning was a breach of duty to ensure the safety and well-being of participants engaging in water sports activities. 2. Duty of Care: Water sports activities, such as water skiing, place a duty of care on tow boat operators to adequately inform participants of any imminent boat movements or actions. The complaint argues that by failing to provide a warning, the operator failed to uphold this duty of care. 3. Non-Verbal Communication: The complaint underscores that a tow boat operator must utilize non-verbal communication methods to ensure the safety of water skiers. In this case, the operator's failure to use standard pre-start signals, such as visual hand gestures or a flag, contributed to the unforeseen injury. 4. Safety Procedures: The complaint will likely touch upon commonly accepted safety procedures for tow boat operators when starting the boat. These may involve using a clear and distinct signal to indicate that the boat is about to start, providing sufficient time for water skiers to prepare and brace themselves. 5. Potential Complaint Types: While the primary focus of the complaint is on negligence resulting from starting the boat without warning, there may be various accompanying types of complaints such as: a. Seaworthiness: If there were any mechanical issues with the tow boat, contributing to the accident, a complaint alleging seaworthiness may be included. This claim suggests that the vessel was in an unfit condition for its intended use. b. Breach of Contract: If the water skier and tow boat operator had a prior contractual agreement or arrangement, the complaint might include an additional claim of breach of contract. This could occur if the operator failed to fulfill his obligation to ensure the water skier's safety as promised in the agreement. Conclusion: In King County, Washington, an ongoing complaint against a tow boat operator revolves around an incident where a water skier suffered injuries due to the operator starting the boat without warning. The detailed description of this complaint highlights the allegations of negligence, the breach of duty of care, and the potential types of associated complaints, such as seaworthiness or breach of contract.
