Ed Law Briefly: N.Y. Court Rules Injured Softball Player Did Not Assume Risk of Wrongly Installed Base
RCEd Commentary
Background: In New York, Ashley Viola, a tenth grade student on the girls’ junior varsity softball team at Carmel High School injured her left ankle when she slid into one of the pointed edges of second base during a game. Ashley’s parents sued, saying the school district’s maintenance personnel negligently anchored the base by positioning it so one of the pointed edges faced the base path.
The Carmel school district moved to dismiss the case under an “assumption of risk” defense — a type of answer that says the plaintiff knew the dangers of an activity going in and decided voluntarily to take the chance. Therefore, the district told the court, Ashley’s parents cannot hold school officials legally responsible after-the-fact for her foreseeable injury. In response, Ashley’s parents submitted depositions from several maintenance personnel employed by the school district acknowledging that an improperly positioned base would constitute an unacceptable and an uncommon hazard to a typical baseball or softball player sliding into a base.
Issue: Ashley’s parents claim the school district, 50 miles north of New York City, was negligent because their daughter (and other members of the girls’ junior varsity softball team) were not warned about the improperly installed base. School officials responded that they were equally unaware of the problem, but that softball players and all other athletes assume the risks of injuries by voluntarily participating in a high school sport.
Legal Principles: At issue in this case is whether the school district can establish a successful assumption of risk negligence defense. In short, did Ashley knowingly and voluntarily assume the risk of harm?
To meet the legal standard for an assumption of risk defense, the school district must prove two factors:
- The injured plaintiff-student has actual knowledge of the risk involved in playing a softball game with an improperly installed base;
- The injured plaintiff-student voluntarily accepted the risk, either expressly by formal agreement or implied by her words or conduct.
Outcome: A state court in New York denied the district’s motion to dismiss, allowing case to proceed to trial. The court concluded that school officials failed to establish that (a) the injured student softball player assumed the risk of her injuries and (b) that Ashley was aware that the base was improperly installed.
The court reasoned that the school district was unconvincing in several ways. The system failed to demonstrate: that the base was properly installed; that the injured student was aware of the improperly positioned base and slid into it anyway; that the improperly installed base was “open and obvious” to others; and that the improperly installed base did not unreasonably increase the risk of injury to Ashley and other softball players on the field.
Lessons for Principals and Teachers:
- The injured party customarily has the legal burden of proof to establish that negligence occurred.
- Four legal elements are necessary to prove negligence: (1) a legal duty; (2) the breach of that duty; (3) the negligent conduct is the proximate, or legal cause of that injury; and (4) an actual injury occurs.
- School officials can raise viable defenses like “assumption of the risk” in attempting to dismiss negligence claims filed by injured students.
Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Appellate Division
Viola v. Carmel Central School District, 945 N.Y.S.2d 155 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012).
Note: This information is not intended as legal advice. Federal and other court decisions can differ depending on what region of the country you live in. State laws also weigh in on certain issues. All cases are for educational purposes only, and meant to demonstrate how courts or administrative agencies have acted in specific instances as well as to provide information that can bolster the overall legal literacy of teachers and administrators. Local school attorneys can provide more detail about local law.
