What follows is a story first published under the byline of Chicago Tribune staff reporter, Michael Higgins, on July 6, 2006:

“A former middle-school pupil who was left a quadriplegic at 13 after a trampoline accident in his extracurricular tumbling class cannot sue Chicago Public Schools, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.

“Lawyers for Ryan Murray, now 26, had argued that school officials failed to supervise the tumbling class properly, allowing 8th graders to spring off a mini-trampoline onto inadequate mats.

“But in a 4-3 vote, the Supreme Court said that school officials were immune from suit unless they acted "willfully and wantonly" to endanger Murray.

“The majority found that while the accident was tragic, the most Murray‘s lawyers could hope to prove was that school officials were negligent.

“‘Clearly there is no evidence that the defendants intended for Ryan to be injured in any way,’ Justice Mary Ann McMorrow wrote for the majority. ‘Trampolining is a hazardous activity, and accidents can occur even when spotters are used and safety equipment is available.’

“The accident occurred Dec. 14, 1992, at Bryn Mawr Elementary School.

“Named as defendants in the case were the Chicago Board of Education, Chicago Youth Centers and the Youth Centers employee who had been supervising the class.

“In a dissenting opinion, Justice Thomas Kilbride argued that Murray should have been allowed to present his case to a jury.

“Kilbride said that, according to Murray‘s expert witness, the lack of adequate mats caused Murray to land "partially on the mat and partially on the bare gymnasium floor."

About The Poster
Attorney Edward A. ("Ted") Bills can be reached at 719.444.1000 or at  http://www.SpringsAttorney.com.

Attorney Ted Bills has one mission – to fight for the rights of personal injury victims and those who have been devastated by the misconduct of others – he represents clients with an aggressive approach designed to provide SWIFT justice.

Attorney Bills is a member of the American Bar Association, the Colorado Bar Association, the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association, and the El Paso County (Colorado Springs) Bar Association. He works in tandem with his clients to provide assertive, business-savvy, legal services that solve problems, reduce delays, and minimize costs.

Nothing on this site constitutes an attorney-client relationship nor does it constitute legal advice.

Personal Injury law comes under the umbrella of law of torts in the US. The name tort is derived from the French word tort, which means wrong. Personal Injury is also a term applied to any damage or harm done to a person’s body, reputation, rights, or property.

Personal Injury claims can be filed under both civil and criminal law suits depending upon the details of the case.

Personal Injury includes, dog bites, motor accidents, wrongful death, product liability, medical malpractice, sexual harassment, emotional duress, bodily harm, damage to reputation, nuisance etc. The person suffering the personal injury may be able to recover damages from the person/company causing the injury.

Damages are financial compensation for loss of income, disability, loss of love and affection, emotional distress, pain etc.

The law of torts is divided into 4 categories: intentional torts, negligence, strict liability and nuisance.

1. Intentional torts are those torts that are committed by a wrong doer purposely. For example: battery, assault, false imprisonment, defamation, trespassing, invasion of privacy, causing emotional distress, racial or sexual discrimination, and etc.
   

2. Negligence torts are those wrongs, which are done unintentionally. They are the most common of the tort cases in court. They include product liability (products that are dangerous to the users even when used correctly), medical malpractice, misdiagnosis, and etc.
   

3. Strict liability torts are those wrongs, which are borne out of occupational hazards and use of dangerous products. They need not be due to negligence of the defendant. Occupational hazards like construction workers, factory workers, and etc. Anywhere it is the duty of the employer to provide a safe working atmosphere.
   

4. Nuisance torts are those wrongs which interfere with an individual’s use of his land or property. For instance noise pollution by a factory, smoking by individuals in public places, and etc.
   

If you are injured, contact a personal injury lawyer to check the merits of the case, to see if a case exists, the amount of potential damages, and etc.

Most law firms take personal injury cases on contingency basis, meaning that the lawyer gets paid from the claim on winning the case.

About The Author:
Attorney Edward A. ("Ted") Bills can be reached at 719.444.1000 or at http://www.SpringsAttorney.com.

Attorney Ted Bills has one mission – to fight for the rights of personal injury victims and those who have been devastated by the misconduct of others – he represents clients with an aggressive approach designed to provide SWIFT justice.

Attorney Bills is a member of the American Bar Association, the Colorado Bar Association, the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association, and the El Paso County (Colorado Springs) Bar Association. He works in tandem with his clients to provide assertive, business-savvy, legal services that solve problems, reduce delays, and minimize costs.

Nothing on this site constitutes an attorney-client relationship nor does it constitute legal advice.

On Monday, June 12, I posted a brief story about a 6-year old boy who allegedly slipped on a wet boardwalk and burned his arms and legs in water from a recently erupted geyser near Old Faithful.

If there were a case it would arise out of the FTCA (Federal Tort Claims Act) if a federal employee was negligent and that employee’s negligence was a direct and proximate cause of the boy’s injuries).

This is a premise liability case, slip and fall, on federal property. The law that would apply however would be Wyoming state law, case law or statutory, applicable to premises liability. The FTCA would be applicable because Yellowstone is a national park (and its employees, who may have been negligent, would be federal employees).

Any good attorney would want to know the answer to this question: What did the boy actually slip on? Was it water from Old Faithful or was it something else, like water from a leaking fountain, which should have been fixed by a federal employee?

Without having knowledge of all the facts in this matter, it is impossible to tell whether there is the potential for liability.

To read more about the basics regarding FTCA claims, see http://www.quintonpetix.com/fedtorac.htm.

FTCA applies in the United States and its territories.  Under FTCA, the United States is liable under circumstances where a private person would be held liable in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred.

The extent of the United States‘ duty of care under the FTCA is a question determined under State law.  Either a State statute or case precedent can impose duty.

Some further basics of premises liability: At common law, the nature and extent of the duty owed by a landowner to an individual depends on the individual’s status as an invitee, a licensee, or a trespasser.  At common law, a landowner usually owes a higher duty to an individual who is invited onto the land or premises, particularly for business purposes (an invitee), than to one who enters without invitation or permission (a trespasser), or to one who enters with the owner’s permission but for his own purposes (a licensee). 

Generally, a licensee is owed a duty to be warned of known dangers only.  An invitee is owed a duty of reasonable inspection to find hidden dangers.   In general, landowners are not insurers of the safety of those who enter their land or premises with permission; instead, landowners are under a duty of reasonable care to protect them from dangerous conditions. 

Landowner liability turns on whether the landowner had actual or merely constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition; this issue is determined by reference to State law.  Landowners may raise the defense that the condition causing the harm was "open and obvious" to the claimant, who remains under a common law duty to act reasonably and to look out for his own personal safety.  If the facts so indicate, the United States may invoke this defense by using the private person analogy.

To learn much more about Wyoming premises law (likely the law in this matter), see http://www.americanwhitewater.org/resources/repository/Wyoming_Recreational_Use_Statute.htm and if an admission fee was charged, pursuant to 34-19-105, liability would attach as a limit to the landowner’s liability (which in general says there is none). Likewise, if the failure to guard or warn was malicious or willful, liability would attach. In all other instances, under the Wyoming Recreation Use Statute, liability would be barred.

About The Author:
Attorney Edward A. ("Ted") Bills can be reached at 719.444.1000 or at http://www.SpringsAttorney.com.

Attorney Ted Bills has one mission – to fight for the rights of personal injury victims and those who have been devastated by the misconduct of others – he represents clients with an aggressive approach designed to provide SWIFT justice.

Attorney Bills is a member of the American Bar Association, the Colorado Bar Association, the Colorado Trial Lawyers Association, and the El Paso County (Colorado Springs) Bar Association. He works in tandem with his clients to provide assertive, business-savvy, legal services that solve problems, reduce delays, and minimize costs.

Nothing on this site constitutes an attorney-client relationship nor does it constitute legal advice.