A New York state appeals court has reversed a lower court, which denied summary judgment motion to a defendant in a case involving a go-kart accident at defendant Strike Holdings, LLC’s premises.
Plaintiff, an adult, commenced this action against Strike and alleged causes of action for negligence, negligent design, strict products liability, failure to warn and breach of warranty after she was bumped by other go-karts during a race at Strike’s premises. She claimed that, as a result of the impact, she sustained Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD), among other injuries.
The Appellate Division, First Department determined that the common-law assumption of the risk doctrine was applicable to go-karting activities and that plaintiff assumed the risk of injury inherent in that activity. Those risks included the risk that her go-kart would bump into objects. The court also held that it was equally foreseeable that there was a risk of collision (intentional or otherwise) of go-karts and that the operator of the track does not have a duty to protect the go-kart rider from the inherent and foreseeable risk of being bumped by another go-kart.
With regard to her sundry product liability claims, the Appellate Division determined plaintiff failed to prove that the subject go-kart was defective. Likewise, her expert opinion from Steve Bernheim was insufficient and relied upon ASTM standards, which were not applicable to her go-kart. Therefore, the case was dismissed in its entirety.
Garnett v. Strike Holdings, LLC Appellate Division, First Department Docket No. 590015/2010 September 1, 2015
Carla Varriale, Jarett L. Warner and Justin Domenech represented Strike Holdings, LLC.
