Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
The interesting thing here for me, and what I take away from all of this is that this kid's condition could have probably been triggered by a team building exercise which wasn't hazing. Had that been the case, the chapter would likely be in the clear. Since this was probably a hazing activity, now the chapter has some serious liability issues.
Foreseeability probably wouldn't be much of a legal issue since the Plaintiff is probably pleading that this was negligence per se. In other words, if the injury occurred while the defendant was violating a statute or regulation, where the harm which occurred was the type the statute seeks to prevent, where the statute's purpose is safety, and that the plaintiff was within the zone of risk, then there's a presumption of negligence.
If the plaintiff here had simply been participating in some sort of a ropes course and had a similar incident, this'd be a completely different ball game.
|
Hmm, interesting point and I agree with you on that. I would hope that any sort of ropes course/team challenge type activities would have a trained facilitator who would ask participants to acknowledge and inform them about any preexisting conditions, and likely sign some sort of waiver. not that having acknowledgement of a condition or signing a waiver would help much in a hazing case, but a reputable challenge course would likely have liability coverage I'm sure.
Hybrid Mode
