Exam
You Be the Judge
1 - A. Marla and Jack, because they say so. A court in Louisiana recently affirmed that in that
state, “registration of a horse does not prove owner- ship.” Courts in other states have similarly held that if the ownership of a horse is in dispute, testimony by a person claiming ownership carries more weight than a certificate issued by a registry. In some European countries, the government actually issues breed pa- pers that are legal documents of title, but there is no equivalent in the United States. A certificate from a breed or performance registry is not a title document but merely “some evidence” of ownership.
2 - F. None of the above. Two courts recently held that a trier of fact may
deviate from market value figures offered by experts in a case. As long as the judge or jury picks a number that is “within the range of evidence presented,” it is not wrong for the judge or jury to consider factors that might warrant an adjustment of the figures proposed by one or more experts.
3 - A. The county is immune because Frannie was en- gaged in a recreational activity when she was killed, and it doesn’t matter that the tree wasn’t on the trail itself. A court in Illinois recently held that a county was
immune from liability for the death of a trail rider who was struck by a falling tree limb. The court explained that the entire park was designated for “recreational use,” and thus the fact that the tree itself was not direct- ly on the riding trail was not outcome determinative.
4 - C. Dismiss them from the lawsuit if they can establish they were not involved in the staging of the event. California court recently affirmed the dismissal of a personal injury lawsuit that was brought against property owners from whose property a horse had escaped. The court concluded that California law ap- plied to relieve the property owners of liability for an injury caused by a recreational user to an off-premises nonparticipant.
5 - D. Allow the lawsuit to go forward because a bro- ken stirrup leather is not an “inherent risk” of the sport. A court in Pennsylvania recently refused to dismiss a man’s lawsuit against a hack stable, holding that
56 March/April 2017
neither the release signed by the man nor the state’s equine activity liability act shielded the stable from li- ability for injuries sustained by the man as a result of defective tack. Based on the testimony of witnesses, the court found that stirrup leather breakage is practically unheard of, and thus ruled that it was not an “inherent risk” of the sport.
Krysia Carmel Nelson is a Virginia at- torney who is a nationally-recognized expert in equine law. She represents horse owners, trainers, riders, breeders, equestrian facilities, farms, clubs and associations across all nationally and internationally recognized disciplines. She currently rides and competes her Hanoverian Affirmed on Appeal in the amateur hunters. She can be reached at
eqlaw@aol.com.
n
Bar
© The Book LLC 2011
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 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92
