What Is Assumption of Risk, and Does It Make Me Liable for My Injuries?
In the context of personal injury law, the concept of "assumption of risk" plays a crucial role in determining liability and compensation. Many people are unclear about what this legal doctrine means and how it might affect their ability to recover damages if they’re injured.
This blog will explore the assumption of risk under New York law, explaining how it applies in various situations and whether it can make you liable for your injuries.
What Is Assumption of Risk?
Assumption of risk is a legal defense that can be used in personal injury cases to reduce or eliminate the liability of a defendant. Under this doctrine, if a person voluntarily and knowingly engages in an activity that has inherent risks, they may be considered to have assumed those risks and, therefore, may be barred from recovering damages if they’re injured.
There are two main types of assumption of risk: express and implied.
Express assumption of risk: This occurs when a person explicitly agrees to accept the risks associated with an activity, often through a written contract or waiver. For example, signing a waiver before participating in a high-risk activity, such as skydiving or bungee jumping, is a form of express assumption of risk.
Implied assumption of risk: Implied assumption of risk occurs when a person’s actions indicate that they understood and accepted the risks involved, even if they didn’t sign a waiver. This might apply when the risks are obvious, such as playing contact sports or attending a baseball game where there’s a chance of being hit by a foul ball.
In New York, courts carefully examine whether the assumption of risk defense applies, considering the specific circumstances of each case.
How Does Assumption of Risk Work in New York?
New York law recognizes assumption of risk as a valid defense in personal injury cases, but its application isn’t always straightforward. The courts will typically look at several factors to determine whether the defense is appropriate.
Voluntary participation: For the assumption of risk to apply, the injured person must have voluntarily chosen to participate in the activity that led to their injury. If they were coerced, misled, or didn’t have a real choice, the defense might not hold up in court.
Knowledge of the risk: The injured person must have been aware of the risks involved in the activity. This doesn’t mean they need to understand every possible danger, but they should have a general awareness of the risks that are inherent to the activity. For example, someone who plays football is generally aware of the risk of getting tackled or injured.
Inherent risks: The risks must be inherent to the activity, meaning they are normal and expected aspects of the activity. If the injury resulted from something outside the ordinary scope of the activity—such as a poorly maintained facility or defective equipment—the assumption of risk defense might not apply.
Exceptions to Assumption of Risk in New York
While assumption of risk can be a strong defense in personal injury cases, there are important exceptions where it may not apply. These exceptions can significantly affect the outcome of a case, allowing an injured person to pursue compensation even if they were aware of the risks.
Reckless or intentional conduct: Assumption of risk doesn’t protect a defendant who acted recklessly or intentionally caused harm. If a defendant’s actions go beyond the normal risks of the activity and involve reckless disregard for safety, the injured person may still be able to recover damages. For instance, if a coach encourages excessively dangerous plays in a sport, leading to an injury, the defense might not apply.
Violations of safety regulations: If the injury occurs due to a violation of safety regulations or laws, the assumption of risk defense may not be valid. For example, if a gym fails to maintain its equipment according to industry standards, and that failure leads to an injury, the injured person may still have a viable personal injury claim.
Gross negligence: Similar to reckless conduct, gross negligence involves a severe lack of care that goes beyond ordinary negligence. In cases of gross negligence, the courts are less likely to apply the assumption of risk defense, allowing the injured party to seek compensation.
How Assumption of Risk Affects Personal Injury Claims
Understanding how the assumption of risk can impact a personal injury claim is crucial for anyone seeking compensation after an injury. If the defense is successfully applied, it can reduce or completely bar recovery, depending on the circumstances.
Comparative Negligence in New York
New York follows a rule of comparative negligence, which means that an injured person’s compensation can be reduced by their percentage of fault in the incident. If the assumption of risk is a factor in the case, the court may determine that the injured person was partially responsible for their injuries due to their voluntary participation and knowledge of the risks. For example, if a person is found to be 30% responsible for their injuries because they assumed the risk, their compensation could be reduced by 30%.
Impact on Settlements
The assumption of risk defense can also play a significant role in settlement negotiations. If the defense is likely to succeed in court, it may lead the injured person to accept a lower settlement offer. Conversely, if there’s evidence that the defense won’t hold up—such as proof of reckless conduct or safety violations—the injured person may have more leverage in negotiations.
What to Do if Assumption of Risk Is Raised in Your Case
If you’re involved in a personal injury case in New York and the defense raises the assumption of risk, it’s important to understand your rights and options. The defense’s goal is to minimize or eliminate liability, so having a clear strategy to counter this defense is essential.
Gather evidence: Collect as much evidence as possible to show that the risks you assumed weren’t inherent to the activity or that the defendant acted recklessly or negligently. This could include photographs, witness statements, or professional testimony about the safety standards that should have been followed.
Analyze the waiver: If you signed a waiver before participating in the activity, review it carefully to see if it covers the specific situation that led to your injury. Waivers don’t automatically absolve the defendant of all liability, especially if they acted in a way that goes beyond ordinary negligence.
Consult with a personal injury attorney: Given the legal challenges involved, it’s often advisable to consult with a personal injury attorney who understands New York law. An attorney can help you build a strong case by analyzing the facts, identifying weaknesses in the assumption of risk defense, and advocating on your behalf.
Balancing Risks and Rights in Personal Injury Cases
Assumption of risk is a significant factor in personal injury cases in New York, but it doesn’t automatically make you liable for your injuries. Understanding how this legal doctrine works, including its limitations and exceptions, is key to protecting your rights and seeking fair compensation.
Whether you’re dealing with a waiver, implied risk, or facing allegations of contributory fault, the outcome of your case will depend on the specific facts and how well you can challenge the defense’s arguments.
By being informed about your legal options and working with a knowledgeable attorney, you can better manage the challenges of personal injury law and strive for a resolution that reflects the true circumstances of your case.
When you need representation in a personal injury case, contact my firm, the Law Office of Steven R. Smith, for a law firm with over 30 years of experience. While some law firms pride themselves on starting a lot of lawsuits, I know that my clients don't want lawsuits; they want settlements. Contact my office today to learn more and schedule your consultation.