Diedrich v. Wright

Summary

The court granted the plaintiff partial summary judgment and struck the defendants' affirmative defenses of assumption of risk and release. It held that the plaintiff did not assume the risk of defective equipment or inadequate instruction and that the release did not clearly and unequivocally exempt the defendants from liability for negligence or strict liability.

Holdings

1. Assumption of risk was unavailable as a matter of law because defendants did not show that Diedrich actually knew of the specific defective condition or inadequate instruction that allegedly caused her injury and deliberately chose to encounter that danger.
2. The release did not, as a matter of law, clearly and unequivocally exempt defendants from liability for their own negligence.
3. The exculpatory clause could not bar an action based on strict liability.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the assumption-of-risk defense was established as a matter of law because Diedrich knew of the general hazards inherent in skydiving.
2. Whether the release form barred Diedrich's negligence claims as a matter of law.
3. Whether an exculpatory clause could bar Diedrich's strict-liability claims.

Disposition

other