race reimbursement of participant medical expenses?

Bradlo wrote:

I'm not sure what the outcome should be legally. However, I do know one thing for sure. I would never hire the OP as an attorney.

Clever.

I am sure what the outcome (would, not should) be legally. We're far past "law" here. My question was directed at custom and industry practice, which are different standards of care and my response to this guy must address more than, "we're not legally obliged."

In 15 years' involvement with a couple large-ish races and many other small ones, I've never heard of a race covering (or being asked to cover) what is tantamount to a participant's gatorade and advil the next day.

I thought maybe some of you had and this would inform that aspect of my response to the guy.

dogscalder wrote:

That aspect of the waiver is legally ineffective where I live. You cannot in advance contractually stipulate away your tort rights for personal injury. We also don't have assumption of the risk as a legal doctrine, so comparative fault will be applied in these situations.

The waiver is somewhat of a deterrent, though, for some folks.

I don't believe this guy is looking to sue. I believe he's just seeing what transpires of his friendly request.

Hadn't ever heard of another race doing this sort of thing...was wondering whether any do.

beard scratcher wrote:

The waiver. Bingo. That's what I was thinking. End of story.

PS: Memo to self. Make sure the people that still mail in registrations but "forget" to sign the waiver, sign it at packet pickup.

The waiver is ineffective? That can't possibly be true. Otherwise, NOBODY would assume the risk of holding a race where you live.

Did the race director actually pay a thieving lawyer to draft a release that isn't enforceable? No wonder people hate lawyers.

Tim Tebone wrote:

The waiver is ineffective? That can't possibly be true. Otherwise, NOBODY would assume the risk of holding a race where you live.

Did the race director actually pay a thieving lawyer to draft a release that isn't enforceable? No wonder people hate lawyers.

It's not "this waiver" that's ineffective. ANY advance "waiver" of liability for personal injury is ineffective under Louisiana law (Civil Code Article 2004). I suspect you'd be surprised to find that the law of the other 49 states is more than mildly receptive to plaintiffs who "waived" their tort rights in advance of being injured as well. Regardless of how well the waiver or release was drafted.

And "assumption of the risk" is a term of art. It's an affirmative defense to a tort (here, personal injury) claim. It would never be used in the manner in which you've used it. To the contrary, "assumption of the risk" would generally be a defense the organizer would raise against an injured participant. In some states, it might be a complete bar to recovery for that plaintiff. In others, concepts like "contributory negligence" might be at play. In Louisiana, we do not have "assumption of the risk" as an available defense, but rather we are a pure comparative fault state (New York, California, etc.). Fault will be apportioned among all responsible parties by percentage, so there's no need for "assumption of the risk" analysis. In any event, the shifting of risk assumption is not really accomplished by the drafting (effective or otherwise) of a release.

Tim Tebone wrote:

The waiver is ineffective? That can't possibly be true. Otherwise, NOBODY would assume the risk of holding a race where you live.

Those liability waivers mostly exist to deter lawsuits. Mission accomplished, I'd say.

Andrew, I want my money sucka!!!!

I passed out in a race a few years back and ended up going to the ER in an ambulance. It never occurred to me to ask the race to pay for it.

In my previous sport (horse-riding), ambulance rides were a bit more common. Not an everyday thing, but I'm pretty sure anyone who's competed in that sport for a while has gone to the ER in an ambulance at least once as the result of a fall at a horse show. I have NEVER heard of anyone ever billing the horse show for their medical costs. Even in those situations where the EMT (paid for by the show) put a lot of pressure on the person to go to the ER.

So that's two sports where this request seems outrageous.

I'd just tell the person that he participated in the event of his own choice and at his own risk, and he is responsible for his own health care costs.

If the race was responsible for this, then what comes next? Do races have to cover the medical bills for every idiot that decides to risk a marathon while recovering from an injury?

Hed have an argument if it were caused by negligence or he was trampled by other runners or something to that effect. Personal medical makes him personally responsible

dogscalder wrote:

This is also how I think things play out in reality...I'd never heard of a non-negligence situation where a runner felt comfortable asking for something like this.

Exactly. Unless the race was negligent, then they're off the hook.

And the OP is a good lawyer because good lawyers shut their mouth until they know the play.

Karl Hungus wrote:

dogscalder wrote:

This is also how I think things play out in reality...I'd never heard of a non-negligence situation where a runner felt comfortable asking for something like this.

Exactly. Unless the race was negligent, then they're off the hook.

And the OP is a good lawyer because good lawyers shut their mouth until they know the play.

Good lawyers also consult a running website for legal advice.

Slick o wrote:

Good lawyers also consult a running website for legal advice.

I think the point of the thread was to gut-check whether this type of request was at all common based on other RDs' experiences. It got buried under a discussion about legal liability, effectiveness of waivers, etc. You know, the real sexy stuff.

In nearly a decade of event production and RDing I've never gotten this request, but if I did I would call the participant back rather than email him. This is both so they could hear me express concern about them, ask whether they're okay, etc (this is what I would lead the call with) and also so that there isn't a paper trail of the interaction, which could only hurt me if I wrote something that inadvertently exposed me to liability (I'm not a lawyer; maybe you, as a lawyer, would feel comfortable putting whatever you want to say in writing, knowing its potential ramifications).

Maybe those two goals seem to be in a bit of tension, but, well, that's life!

corpus juris secum-dumpster wrote:

Slick o wrote:

Good lawyers also consult a running website for legal advice.

I think the point of the thread was to gut-check whether this type of request was at all common based on other RDs' experiences. It got buried under a discussion about legal liability, effectiveness of waivers, etc. You know, the real sexy stuff.

This response, including the name it was posted under, gets the A-STAR. Model answer. CALI award. Etc.

Not An Expert wrote:

In nearly a decade of event production and RDing I've never gotten this request, but if I did I would call the participant back rather than email him. This is both so they could hear me express concern about them, ask whether they're okay, etc (this is what I would lead the call with) and also so that there isn't a paper trail of the interaction, which could only hurt me if I wrote something that inadvertently exposed me to liability (I'm not a lawyer; maybe you, as a lawyer, would feel comfortable putting whatever you want to say in writing, knowing its potential ramifications).

Maybe those two goals seem to be in a bit of tension, but, well, that's life!

Thanks, this is the sort of response I was looking for. I found the request pretty odd, myself, given what I've surmised about this athlete and his capabilities.

CCC10K wrote:

Andrew, I want my money sucka!!!!

:) you probably owe me a tax form if you're writing on your own behalf. Check is NOT in the mail.