Legal Liability

Is a responsibility that someone has for their actions, for example the responsibility to
pay another person for harm or damage that is a result of these actions: Failure to
comply with the latest regulations could result in legal liability if patient health is
affected.

Legal liabilities are part of civil law and criminal law. For example, if a company commits
fraudulent accounting practices or fails to comply with government labor laws, it may
face charges in criminal court and will probably be forced to pay damages to concerned
parties. This is a criminal legal liability.

A legal liability is a commitment imposed on a party as the result of a contract or

civil action. A legal liability may be covered by insurance. It may also be voided by
the legal structure of a business; thus, the legal liabilities of a corporation do not
extend to its shareholders.

Examples of Legal Liability

For example, being the party to a contract to provide services to a customer

imposes a legal liability on the seller to provide those services. Or, a court finds that
a firm has a legal liability as the result of a lawsuit brought by a customer, due to a
broken product that damaged the property of the customer.

Tort Law
Conduct that harms other people or their property is generally called a tort. It is a private wrong
against a person for which the person may recover damages. The injured party may sue the
wrongdoer to recover damages to compensate him for the harm or loss caused. The conduct that
is a tort may also be a crime. A crime is a wrong arising from a violation of a public duty. A tort
is a wrong arising from the violation of a private duty. Again, however, a crime can also
constitute a tort. For example, assault is a tort, but it is also a crime. A person who is assaulted
may bring charges against the assailant and have him prosecuted criminally and may also sue the
assailant for damages under tort law. An employee’s theft of his employer’s property that was
entrusted to the employee constitutes the crime of embezzlement as well as the tort of
conversion.

A tort is defined as “a wrongful act or an infringement of a right (other than under contract)
leading to civil legal liability.” A tort occurs when a person wrongs someone else in a way that
exposes the offender to legal liability. This harm doesn’t always occur because someone
intentionally sets out to harm another person on purpose. Rather, a person can commit a tort by
acting negligently or failing to act appropriately. In addition, in some types of tort cases, an actor
is strictly liable for the damages they cause even when they are as careful as possible.

Tort law determines whether a person should be held legally accountable for an injury against
another, as well as what type of compensation the injured party is entitled to.

In tort lawsuits, the injured party—referred to as the “plaintiff” in civil cases (comparable to the
prosecutor in a criminal case)—seeks compensation, typically through the representation of
a personal injury attorney, from the “defendant” for damages incurred (i.e. harm to property,
health, or well-being).

Examples and Types of Torts

Tort lawsuits are the biggest category of civil litigation and can encompass a wide range of
personal injury cases. However, there are 3 main types: intentional torts, negligence, and strict
liability.

There are three types of torts: intentional torts; negligence; and strict liability. An intentional
tort is a civil wrong that occurs when the wrongdoer engages in intentional conduct that results
in damages to another. Striking another person in a fight is an intentional act that would be the
tort of battery. Striking a person accidentally would not be an intentional tort since there was not
intent to strike the person. This may, however, be a negligent act. Careless conduct that results
in damage to another is negligence.

Generally, liability because of a tort only arises where the defendant either intended to cause
harm to the plaintiff or in situations where the defendant is negligent. However, in some areas,
liability can arise even when there is no intention to cause harm or negligence. For example, in
most states, when a contractor uses dynamite which causes debris to be thrown onto the land of
another, causing damages such as broken windows, the landowner may recover damages from
the contractor even though the contractor may not have been negligent and did not intend to
cause any harm. This is called strict liability or absolute liability. Basically, society is saying
that the activity is so dangerous to the public that there must be liability. However, society is not
going so far as to outlaw the activity.

Intentional torts

An intentional tort is when an individual or entity purposely engages in conduct that causes
injury or damage to another. For example, striking someone in a fight would be considered an
intentional act that would fall under the tort of battery; whereas accidentally hitting another
person would not qualify as “intentional” because there was no intent to strike the individual
(however, this act may be considered negligent if the person hit was injured).
 Although it may seem like an intentional tort can be categorized as a criminal case, there are
important differences. A crime can be defined as a wrongful act that injures or interferes with the
interests of society. In comparison, intentional torts are wrongful acts that injure or interfere with
an individual’s well-being or property.

While criminal charges are brought by the government and can result in a fine or jail sentence,
tort charges are filed by a plaintiff seeking monetary compensation for damages that the
defendant must pay if they lose.

Sometimes a wrongful act may be both a criminal and tort case. A victim can typically recover
more financial damages from a civil case than a criminal case.

Examples of intentional torts

 Assault
 Battery
 False imprisonment
 Conversion
 Intentional infliction of emotional distress
 Fraud/deceit
 Trespass (to land and property)
 Defamation

Negligence

The most important type of tort to understand in sports risk management and sports law is
negligence. Negligence is conduct that falls below a reasonable person standard. In other words,
it is the failure to exercise reasonable care that a reasonably prudent person would have in the
same or similar circumstances. This standard applies to acts as well as omissions.

Example: Ben drove a car on a country road at 35 miles an hour. The maximum speed limit was
45 miles an hour. He struck and killed a cow that was crossing the road. The owner of the cow
sued Ben for the value of the cow. Ben raised the defense that since he was not driving above the
speed limit, there could be no liability for negligence. Was this defense valid? No. A person must
at all times act in the manner in which a reasonable person would act under the circumstances.
The fact that Ben was driving within the speed limit was only one of the circumstances to
consider. The weather or the condition of the road may have made it unreasonable to drive at 35
miles an hour. Driving slower than the speed limit does not in and of itself prove that the driver
was acting reasonably. The reasonable person standard varies in accordance with the situation.
Generally, when a jury is involved, what is reasonable are what members of the jury believed is
reasonable.

The following negligence claims frequently appear in sports-related injury cases:

 Failure to properly train

 Failure to be properly credentialed
 Inadequate supervision
 Failure to properly observe, refer, or stabilize the injured player
 Unequal matching of opponents (boxing)
 Improper return to play
 Improper equipment or fitting
 Improper screening or physicals
 Failure to warn of risks
 Failure to enact proper rules for concussions or return to play
 Failure to stop or curtail risky or violent conduct
 Medical malpractice
 Negligent hiring or retention of personnel
 Improper design or maintenance of playing field or premises
 Failure to have an emergency medical plan
 Improper medical clearance

This list of claims is not meant to be all-inclusive, but rather sets forth various examples of
claims that have been made in recent years. Irrespective of the type of claim, there must always
be evidence sufficient to support a finding of each of the four elements of negligence, that is,
duty, breach, causation, and damages.

Product liability cases stand alone in a separate category. These claims are typically filed against
the manufacturer or distributor of the equipment, alleging that the product was defective in
design or manufacture or that the manufacturer failed to warn of known dangers with the use of
the product. Some product cases may also include an allegation that the pro

There is a specific code of conduct that every person is expected to follow, and a legal duty of
the public to act a certain way in order to reduce the risk of harm to others.

Failure to adhere to these standards is known as negligence.

Negligence is by far the most common type of tort.

Unlike intentional torts, negligence cases do not involve deliberate actions. Negligence occurs
when a person fails to act carefully enough and another person gets hurt as a result. For this type
of case, a person must owe a duty to another person. Then, they must fail in their duty to act
reasonably. Finally, that failure must result in harm and damages.

For example, a driver on the road has a duty to drive at a reasonable speed. If a driver travels 20
miles over the speed limit, they have acted negligently. If they hit someone and hurt them, they
have committed a negligence tort and likely owe the victim for their losses.
 Another common example of negligence torts are cases of slip and fall, which occur when a
property owner fails to act as a reasonable person would, thus resulting in harm to the visitor or
customer. For example, a janitor has a duty to put up a wet floor sign after mopping. If he or she
fails to put up the sign and someone falls and injures themselves, a negligence tort case may be
filed.

Examples of negligence torts

 Slip and fall accidents

 Car accidents
 Truck accidents
 Motorcycle accidents
 Pedestrian accidents
 Bicycle accidents
 Medical malpractice

Strict liability

Lastly, there are torts involving strict liability. Strict, or “absolute,” liability applies to cases
where responsibility for an injury can be imposed on the wrongdoer without proof of negligence
or direct fault. If a case is a strict liability tort, the victim has a right to recover even if the
responsible party took every precaution and didn’t hurt them intentionally. The only thing the
victim must prove is that they were hurt because of the other person’s actions. What matters is
that an action occurred and resulted in the eventual injury of another person.

In lawsuits such as these, the injured consumer only has to establish that their injuries were
directly caused by the product in question in order to have the law on their side. The fact that the
company did not “intend” for the consumer to be injured is not a factor.

Defective product and dog bite cases are prime examples of when liability is maintained despite
intent.

Examples of strict liability torts

 Defective products (Product Liability)

 Animal attacks (dog bite lawsuits)
 Abnormally dangerous activities

Products liability is major area of sports tort law. Participants use all different types of sports-
related equipment. Products liability refers to the liability of any or all parties along the chain of
manufacture of any product for damage caused by that product. This includes the manufacturer
of component parts, an assembling manufacturer, the wholesaler, and the retail store owner.
Product liability suits may be brought by the purchaser of the product or by someone to whom
the product was loaned. Products liability claims can be based on negligence, strict liability, or
breach of warranty of fitness.[1] In a strict liability theory of liability, the degree of care
exercised by the manufacturer is irrelevant. If the product is proven to be defective, the
manufacturer may be held liable for the harm resulting from the defect.

There are elements that a plaintiff in a lawsuit has to prove in order for a defendant to be found
to be negligent. The four elements of negligence are as follows:

1. Duty or Duty of Care–There is a relationship between the defendant and the plaintiff so that
the defendant owes a duty to exercise reasonable care to the plaintiff. This duty could arise out of
a relationship, such as between a general manager of a sports team and a spectator. It could arise
out of a voluntary assumption of a duty, such as a coach giving a player a ride home from a
game. Or, the duty could be imposed by statute, such as a law requiring that spectator’s bags be
searched before entering a sports stadium. In these relationships, the defendant has a duty to
anticipate foreseeable dangers and take necessary precautions to protect the plaintiff.

2. Breach of Duty–The defendant breached the duty of care that he or she owed to the plaintiff.
In other words, did the defendant’s actions or failure to act fall below the standard of care
applicable to the given situation? If there is a safety rule that is in place, that rule might be
determined to be the standard of care. For example, if there is a rule requiring a soccer field to be
inspected for potentially hazardous objects before play can begin, then such inspection may be
determined to be the standard of care. If there is no such rule and a standard of care cannot easily
be discerned, the question is how a reasonably prudent person would have behaved in the same
or similar situation.

3. Proximate Cause–There must be a proximate causal connection between the negligent

conduct and the resulting injury. For example: there was a hole in the netting that was designed
to protect spectators behind home plate at a baseball stadium. A spectator got hit in the face by a
foul ball that went through the hole, causing a serious eye injury. Evidence at trial established
that the manager of the stadium knew that the hole in the netting was there, failed to fix it and so
the court found that his negligence was the proximate cause of the spectator’s injury. If the court
found that the spectator had a pre-existing eye injury and the errant ball was not the cause of her
injury, the element of proximate cause would not have been met.

4. Damages–The plaintiff has to suffer an actual injury or damages. If in the previous example,
the spectator could not prove that she was injured by the ball that hit her, then the fourth element
would not have been met.
In order for your organization to avoid lawsuits alleging negligent behavior, it is best to train
employees and volunteers to do their best to exercise reasonable care that a reasonably prudent
person would have in the same or similar circumstances.
 The degree of care required of a person is that which an ordinarily prudent person would exercise
under similar circumstances. This does not necessarily mean a degree of care that would have
prevented the harm from occurring. This degree of care varies. For example, if one is engaged in
a service involving skill (such as a medical doctor) the care must be measured in light of what an
ordinarily prudent skilled person (e.g., doctor) would be. The question the jury seeks to
determine is what care and skill would reasonably be expected under the circumstances involved
in the case. Plaintiff must prove that:

 The defendant owed a duty of care to the plaintiff;

 The defendant breached that duty to the plaintiff;
 The conduct of defendant was unreasonable;
 The defendant was the proximate cause of the breach of duty; and
 There is evidence of damages.

If the plaintiff fails in proving any of these points, the plaintiff’s claim should not succeed. In
order for someone to be legally responsible for damages, it is necessary to show that the
wrongful act was the cause of the harm. The legal term is that the act must be the proximate
cause of the harm.

The final element of negligence is damages. A plaintiff may recover monetary damages to
compensate the plaintiff for economic losses such as lost wages and medical expenses. A
plaintiff may also recover non-economic losses such as for pain and suffering. Punitive damages
may also be appropriate. Punitive damages are designed to punish the defendant for his
wrongdoing and are generally only appropriate if the plaintiff can prove gross negligence or
willful misconduct.

Contributory Negligence versus Comparative Negligence

If the negligence of the plaintiff is partially responsible for his harm, his recovery from the
defendant may be reduced or barred. This is called contributory or comparative negligence. In a
small minority of states, the contributory negligence rule states that if the plaintiff contributes to
his harm, he cannot recover from the defendant. In most states, this rule has been rejected
because it has been regarded as unjust in situations where the plaintiff’s negligence was slight in
comparison to the defendant’s negligence.

Comparative negligence provides that there should be a comparing of the negligence of the
plaintiff and the defendant. This is the rule followed in most states. The negligence of the
plaintiff would not bar recovery in these states, but would only reduce the plaintiff’s recovery to
the extent that the harm was caused by plaintiff. For example, if the jury decides that the plaintiff
has sustained damages of $100,000.00, but that his own negligence was one-fourth the cause of
the damage, the plaintiff would only be allowed to recover $75,000.00.[2]
Assumption of risk is a defense which a defendant can raise which basically states that the
plaintiff has knowingly assumed the risk of the harm that was caused. A fan hit by a basketball at
a basketball game has assumed the risk of getting hit because it is a known danger that
basketballs sometimes go into the stands because of a bad pass or if a player misses a pass.

Gross Negligence

What happens when sports participants break the rules so badly that it appears the sole purpose
of a player was to injure another player intentionally during a game?. This level of recklessness
is difficult to prove. However, if the plaintiff is successful, the plaintiff may recover punitive
damages for the outrageous conduct of the defendant in addition to the general damages (e.g.,
medical bills and loss of wages).

Spectator Injuries

While most sports torts involve personal injuries caused by participants against each other, a
spectator to a sporting event might be injured. Some examples are foul balls, deflected hockey
pucks, and flying debris (at a Nascar event). In such an event, who is responsible for the
spectator’s injuries? Does the owner of a stadium have a duty to warn or protect spectators from
foul balls or other foreseeable injuries? American courts have refused to allow recovery for
injuries to spectators caused by the open and obvious rules of the game, particularly when it
comes to foul balls. On the other hand, what about other sports, such as golf, hockey, and
football when an activity on the field might impact the fans in the stands (e.g. fights between
spectators)? Does an owner of a stadium owe a duty to spectators to prevent all foreseeable
injuries, or does common sense impose some duties on the spectators themselves? Do cities and
counties have to warn recreational swimmers that diving into shallow water could expose them
to a risk of danger? It is wise to post signs that warn of potential dangers but to warn of all
possible dangers are clearly not possible in the sports context. If a sign is at issue, the adequacy
of the posting of the sign is usually the focus of the analysis.

In 2002, a 13-year-old girl died after she was hit in the head by a hockey puck that shot over the
glass during the Columbus Blue Jackets NHL hockey game in March 2002. She died two days
after she was hit. The ticket stubs had warnings about the dangers due to flying pucks. It is
unlikely that such warnings provide an absolute defense to death from flying pucks.

When large crowds gather for sporting events, there is a greater likelihood of injuries to
spectators. Balancing fun, safety, and security have been an issue for organizers of events for
many years. A person who operates a place of public amusement or entertainment must exercise
reasonable care with regard to the construction, maintenance, and management of his buildings
or structures and his premises, having regard to the character of entertainment given and the
customary conduct of persons attending such entertainment. The operator must employ sufficient
personnel to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition. He or she must use ordinary
care to maintain the floors and aisles along which patrons are expected to pass in a reasonably
safe condition for their use; and this principle has been applied in cases where personal injury
resulted from a slippery floor, aisle, ramp or walkway, defective carpet, or the presence of an
object the floor or in the aisle.
 Res ipsa loquitur is a Latin term meaning the thing speaks for itself. It is a doctrine of law that
one is presumed to be negligent if he/she had exclusive control of whatever caused the injury
even though there is no specific evidence of an act of negligence, and the accident would not
have happened without negligence. The traditional elements needed to prove negligence through
the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur include:

 The harm would not ordinarily have occurred without someone’s negligence;
 The instrumentality of the harm was under the exclusive control of the defendant at the time of
the likely negligent act; and
 The plaintiff did not contribute to the harm by his own negligence.

The res ipsa loquitur doctrine has been applied in actions for injuries caused by the falling of
various objects in theaters or other public places of amusement or exhibition, including:

 The fall of an object or substance from the ceiling;

 The striking of a traveler on the public streets by a baseball which came over a fence surrounding
a baseball park.
 The striking of a fisherman in the eye by his or her fishing companion while the latter was
casting.

In some cases involving defective seats or the collapse of a seat, bleachers, grandstands, a
balcony, or the like, it has been held that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur was applicable, or at
least that such a happening warranted the inference that the plaintiff’s injury was caused by the
negligence of the defendant. Since the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur generally is limited to those
cases where it appears that the instrumentality which caused the injury was under the sole and
exclusive control and management of the defendant, the courts have, as a general rule, refused to
apply the doctrine where injury resulted from the pushing, crowding, or jostling of other patrons.

Wrongful Death

When somebody dies in consequences of a wrongful act a person, either by negligence or by a

deliberate act, such a death is called wrongful death. This is the civil equivalent of the criminal
charge of one of the forms of homicide, including murder. Should a sports participant be held
liable for the death of another athlete or a spectator? Virtually all sports involve an activity and
an aspect of risk that could lead to the death of a participant. It is important for architects and
administrators to provide protective screening and appropriate warnings for participants and
spectators related to such concerns. What about fights? What about slugging someone in the face
with a hockey stick?

Malpractice in Sports

Malpractice is a failure by an physician or other professional to use the care and skill that other
members of their profession would use under similar circumstances. When an accountant,
doctor, attorney, or some other professional contracts to perform services, there is a duty to
exercise skill and care as is common within the community for persons performing similar
services. Failure to fulfill that duty is malpractice. What about team physicians and trainers.
What if a trainer or doctor employed by a team rather than the player recommends that the
injured player participate? To whom does the medical practitioner owe a duty of care, the player
or the team? Sometimes this decision is not clear cut. Malpractice is a broad category and could
involve anything from an improper diagnosis to the prescription of an inappropriate medication.

Sports Officials

Another area of sports torts involves the officials of games or other sports contests. Officials in
sports can greatly affect the outcome of the sports contest. Professional sports such as football,
basketball, and hockey have incorporated the use of the television replay to ensure that the often
subjective regulation of the sports contest remains as objective as possible. Sports officials,
however, are often subject to harassment, intimidation, and sometimes violent, physical or verbal
abuse from fans, players, and coaches. Whether at the professional or amateur level, sports
officials are often the targets of hostile emotions due to the extreme competitiveness in the sports
arena. Due to numerous lawsuits against sports officials for alleged intentional misconduct, states
have been forced to enact laws that protect officials and provide immunity from such lawsuits.
Immunity from civil suits only applies to unintentional, negligent acts by the officials. This
affords the sports official some protection against litigation.

Workers Compensation

For most kinds of employment, state workers’ compensation statutes govern compensation for
injuries. The statutes provide that the injured employee is entitled to compensation for accidents
occurring in the course of employment. Every State has some form of workers’ compensation
legislation. The statutes vary widely from State to State. When an employee is covered by a
workers’ compensation statute, and when the injury is job connected, the employee’s remedy is
limited to what is provided in the worker’s compensation statute.

Compensation for injuries to an athlete is a prime subject for any collective bargaining
agreement in professional sports that involve a players association or union When players are
injured from an activity arising out of and in the course of their employment, the private
agreement between the players, team, and league often avoid any necessity of filing a claim
under the state’s workers compensation statute.

Since being an employee is a prerequisite to filing a claim under workers compensation, usually
only professional athletes may consider filing a claim. Should student-athletes who receive
athletic scholarships be entitled to compensation if they suffer a temporary or permanent injury
while participating in their sport for their school, college, or university? It seems clear that the
student-athlete has not yet been given the right to claim workers compensation since they are not
yet recognized as employees. However, the NCAA has a Catastrophic Insurance Plan covering
every student who participates in college sports, including managers, trainers, and cheerleaders.
One can learn more about this plan by visiting the NCAA website (www.ncaa.org).

Insurance
Since any sports activity involves a degree of risk or injury, it is generally recognized that events
and participants should purchase insurance to protect against a claim of negligence arising from
that activity. Sports insurance policies do not relieve an individual or event from liability from
negligent behavior. However, having insurance does ensure that if a judge or jury believes that
damages should be awarded for an injury arising from the activity, the insurance company stands
in the shoes of the defendant and must therefore pay in accordance with terms of the insurance
policy. Exceptional student-athletes and professional athletes are wise to purchase a policy that
covers their own participation in the activity. Such insurance for the professional athlete may be
referred to as a career-ending injury insurance and usually requires large premiums to maintain
because of the potential for great financial loss, especially at the professional level.

Commercial Misappropriation

Though athletes may find that a successful suit under defamation standards is extremely difficult,
an area that proves worthy of a lawsuit involves the use of the athlete’s name, image, or likeness
without the athlete’s consent in order to make a profit or sale. Such non-approved use of an
athlete’s persona is referred to as commercial misappropriation. Since manufacturers and other
sellers of products and services commonly use an athlete in marketing in the form of an
endorsement contract, athletes must be cognizant to protect from the unauthorized misuse of
their image. Establishing a trademark (including an Internet domain name) for one’s name or
image may be necessary for professional athletes (and certainly professional and amateur leagues
and organizations) to prevent improper use of a name for profit.

Products Liability

Products liability in sports represents an area of negligence involving a sporting goods. When
plaintiffs sue a manufacturer of sporting goods, the claimants allege that they suffered an injury
due to the use of a product that was defective. Bats, gloves, shoes, helmets, pads and other goods
used in a sport are subject to a lawsuit if there is a defect in the design or manufacturing process.
This may be referred to as a manufacturing defect or design defect.

Manufacturers of goods may also be sued for failing to warn the user of potential dangers
involving use of the product. Since goods are involved, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) is
often called into play, and the user of the product alleges that there was a breach of the warranty
of merchantability or a breach of the implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose. UCC
Article 2 governs the sales of goods and has been adopted in whole or in part by every state.
Contributory Negligence

When an injury occurs, both the defendant and the plaintiff can be at fault. For example,
in a car accident between car A and car B, car A’s driver was speeding and car B’s driver was
driving drunk. Both drivers are engaged in negligent risk creating behavior. The negligence on
the part of the injured plaintiff is called contributory negligence.

Contributory negligence is the plaintiff's failure to exercise reasonable care for their
safety. A plaintiff is the party who brings a case against another party (the defendant).
Contributory negligence can bar recovery or reduce the amount of compensation a plaintiff
receives if their actions increased the likelihood that an incident occurred. Often, defendants use
contributory negligence as a defense.

A plaintiff “contributes” to his own injury when his behavior falls below what is required
by the reasonable person standard, which gauges what the reasonable person would have done to
protect himself from injury.[2] In other words, contributory negligence requires everyone to take
reasonable steps to avoid danger.[3] Traditionally, contributory negligence was a harsh rule. It
completely barred a negligent plaintiff from recovering, no matter how minor the plaintiff’s
fault. If a plaintiff had any part to play in his on injury, no matter how minimal, the plaintiff
could not recover from the defendant. For example, Timmy leaves the bar from a heavy night of
drinking and slams his car into Ronald’s car, which is parked illegally on the side of the road.
Ronald is injured and files a lawsuit against Timmy. Under contributory negligence, Ronald
would not recover from Timmy for Ronald’s injuries despite Timmy’s drunk driving. Ronald
contributed to his own injuries by parking his car illegally and is therefore barred from recovery

Assumption of Risk

Assumption of risk is the third primary negligence defense. A plaintiff is said to “assume
the risk” of injury if he voluntarily enters a dangerous situation fully aware of the risk involved.
The principle behind this defense is that a plaintiff who voluntarily consents to an activity cannot
later sue if injured. “Voluntary” means the person assuming the risk had a choice to avoid it. If
the person had no choice to avoid the dangerous activity then he cannot have assumed the risk.

For example, in a 2007 personal injury lawsuit brought by a student against a community
college, a 40-year-old student successfully sued the school for injuries she suffered in a
backpacking class. The class was mandatory as part of the college’s physical education
requirement. The court held that because she was new to backpacking, she was in the position of
following the directions of the gym instructor, her superior, and thus did not assume the risk
voluntarily.

Voluntarily assuming the risk can be either expressed or implied. Expressed consent may
be written, verbal, or through any other expressed manifestation. Consent can be implied by the
plaintiff’s knowledge of the risk and subsequent conduct. To prove the plaintiff impliedly
assumed the risk, the defendant must show 1) the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the danger
involved 2) the plaintiff understood and appreciated the risks associated with the danger and 3)
the plaintiff voluntarily participated in the activity with full knowledge of the danger. Implied
consent is most commonly associated with sports. If a person participates in a sporting activity,
there is implied consent that the person is subjecting himself to injury foreseeably associated
with that sport. For example, a race car driver impliedly assumes the risk of serious injury or
death from a crash each time he races.

Waiver Form

A release form or a waiver is simply a legal document containing an agreement between two
parties. The first party is the releasor (person promising not to sue) and the releasee (the party
that is reliable). When the form is signed, the releasor accepts that they understand the risks
involved and promises not to sue the releasee for any damages caused.

A waiver is an essential document that informs participants of the risks involved in certain
activities and also protects you from liability. In some cases, you may limit your liability as a
business by asking participants to sign a hold- harmless agreement. This form simply lets the two
parties settle matters out of court.

WHAT CAN MY PROGRAM DO TO ENSURE ADEQUATE RISK MANAGEMENT IN

OUR INTRAMURAL PROGRAM
It is essential to identify risk management concerns in intramural sports to eliminate unnecessary
risks, and mitigate those risks which are unavoidable. In order to mitigate the unavoidable risks,
there are certain measures which must be implemented. Prior to the start of a new academic year
it is important for the intramural director to:

a. Develop A Risk Management Plan

Meet with university General Counsel/Risk Management Team
1. Discuss any changes or rulings in tort liability which may affect the program
2. Draft or review the waiver/consent form
3. Establish minimum certification standards for student employees
4. Establish a exact minimum threshold for incidents requiring documentation
b. Train & Instruct Student Staff
1. Identify all safety training protocols necessary for the specific needs of the program
2. Make sure all supervisors are trained and certified in appropriate emergency protocol (e.g. 1st
Aid/CPR/AED/Blood Pathogens/MRSA)
3. Develop an emergency action plan where all staff positions are given specific roles in the
event of an emergency
4. Demonstrate the importance of documentation
a. Rehearse competent written communication between student and professional staff
b. Ensure a process to implement waivers is in place
5. Continually update and refresh employees in safety protocol
a. Communicate changes or issues to student staff
b. Integrate resultant examples from the program into instruction
c. Test staff understanding of policies and procedures through interactive situational illustrations
6. Ensure all referees are properly qualified and trained
c. Document Everything
1. Keep copies of each supervisor’s certification/ qualifications on file
2. Ensure facilities and equipment are checked daily through the use of daily checklists
3. Have a general log of the daily activities regardless of any incidents
4. When there is an incident, the appropriate forms must be completed by program staff and
given to professional staff for review and filing
5. Continually update & evaluate program policies and procedures
d. Facilities and Equipment
1. Inspect and inventory all equipment to ensure that they conform with governing regulations
2. Determine who is going to conduct inspections and the frequency of the inspections of all
playing facilities and program equipment
3. Identify any natural hazards which may come into play during outdoor sports and develop a
plan to manage these hazards.
Intramural programs are unique within Campus Recreation because of the high volume and level
of interaction between participants. Furthermore, the majority of programming occurs under the
direct supervision of student staff. Therefore it is essential that student staff be given the
knowledge and training to efficiently and effectively run a safe intramural program.