Exam A
Test your knowledge of equine law. by Attorney Krysia Nelson
Case #1: The Annoying Mower
woman with over 20 years of riding experience was rid- ing a trainer’s horse in the
arena at the equestrian center owned and oper- ated by the trainer. The trainer started a small riding lawn mower close to the arena where the woman was riding. The woman alleged that in response to the sound of the starting mower, the horse first put its ears back and then began bucking and kicking. The woman lost control of the horse and was thrown to the ground. She later sued, seeking compensation for her injuries. The trainer claimed immunity under the Georgia Equine Activities Act and alleged the woman as- sumed the risk of injury. The court explained the woman did not dis-
agree that the act was applicable to the case, but argued that the trainer’s behavior in start- ing up the lawn mower fell into the “willful and wanton” exception to immunity under the act. The woman argued that whether the trainer’s actions were willful and wanton was a question for the jury, and prevented the early dismissal of the case.
Which describes how the trial court ruled? In favor of the injured rider. What was the
trainer thinking? The trainer is clearly respon- sible for spooking the horse because she deliber- ately started the mower. In favor of the trainer. Riding is a danger-
ous sport. The trainer is immune under the law. In favor of the trainer. The woman was an
experienced rider and could have done a bet- ter job avoiding the accident. For example, she could have ridden the horse to the other side of the arena when she saw her trainer getting on the mower. In favor of the injured rider. She did not assume the risk of her trainer doing something completely stupid.
☛ Turn page for the outcome. 48 September/October 2015 Case #2: The Fighting Ponies A
man was invited by a friend to the property where the friend kept several ponies.
The man led a pony from the barn and tied it to a ring located outside the barn. The man then went back into the barn and brought out a second pony, tying it to the same ring. The friend (the ponies’ owner) then warned the man, “They’re going to fight.” The ponies commenced fighting and their owner attempted to grab one of the pony’s leads, and the man jumped in to help. According to the court, “after the ponies stopped fighting, one of the horses looked [the man] in the eye, and then bit him on the neck. The bite caused physical injury, including nerve damage and pain and dis- comfort.” The man sued. The owner of the ponies asked the court to dismiss the man’s lawsuit. He argued that the state equine activity law barred the lawsuit because it provides that a person “is not liable in damages in a tort or other civil action for harm that an equine activity participant allegedly sustains during an equine activity and that results from an inherent risk of an equine activity” unless the person com- mits an act or omission that “constitutes a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of an equine activity participant and proximately causes the harm involved.” The owner argued that, having warned the victim that the ponies were going to start fighting, he had not willfully nor wantonly disregarded the man’s safety.
Which describes how the trial court ruled? In favor of the injured man. What was his
friend thinking? He should have warned the man sooner so that the fight could have been averted. In favor of the injured man. Because the man
was not riding the ponies, the equine immunity law does not apply. In favor of the owner of the ponies. Ponies will be ponies. That’s why we have an immunity law.
In favor of the owner of the ponies. When the man threw himself into the middle of the pony fighting fray, he was just asking for it.
☛ Turn page for the outcome.
Bar
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76