A federal judge from the District of Maine has affirmed his magistrate judge’s decision that denied summary judgment to a summer camp, which was sued by a participant who suffered an injury while riding a horse.
On July 30, 2006, during a horseback riding lesson at Camp Laurel in Mount Vernon, Maine, twelve-year-old Samantha Zuckerman sustained injuries when she fell from Tinkerbell, the pony she was riding.
Claiming negligence, the girl, through her mother, Roberta Zuckerman, sued Coastal Camps, Inc., doing business as Camp Laurel, seeking damages for personal injuries. Zuckerman alleged that her instructors improperly saddled Tinkerbell and, as a result, her saddle slipped, causing her to fall.
At the time of the accident, Zuckerman was learning to canter and Sarah Balmer, one of Camp Laurel’s riding instructors, was leading Tinkerbell around an enclosed ring on a lunge line. Pamela Payson, the head of Camp Laurel’s equestrian program, was present and saw the girl fall.
Throughout the summer and at the time of the accident, Camp Laurel used fleece-lined girths on Tinkerbell and the other horses. The plaintiff alleged that that Camp Laurel did not follow proper protocol when saddling Tinkerbell that day, which led to the accident.
This allegation contradicted the employees’ recollection that the plaintiff “fell off Tinkerbell because she lost her balance.”
Nevertheless, Zuckerman sued, alleging that the Camp Laurel breached its duty of care “by failing to ensure that Tinkerbell was properly saddled.”
Camp Laurel moved for summary judgment on the ground that it is immune from liability under Maine Equine Activities Act (Act), 7 M.R.S.A. § 4101 et seq., because a slipping saddle is a risk inherent to the sport of horseback riding.
After reviewing the arguments, the court held that the defendant’s attempt to define plaintiff’s case as fitting within the general rule against liability for risks inherent to equine activities failed because “there was a factual question as to whether Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 7, § 4103-A(2)(A)’s exception to immunity for providing faulty equipment or tack applied.”
Further, it found that that “if the instructor used a girth that was wrong for the pony, given the pony’s weight and shape, and if fleece-lined girths were more prone to slippage than other types, then the girth might have fit within the definition of the term ‘faulty’ as it was used in Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 7, § 4103-A(2)(A).
Zuckerman v. Camp Laurel ; D.ME; 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55754; 6/4/10
Attorneys or Record: (for plaintiffs) Thomas L. Douglas, Murray Plumb & Murray, Portland, ME. (for defendant) Rodney Elliott Gould, Lead Attorney, Rubin, Hay & Gould, P.C., Framingham, MA; John B. Cole, Auburn, ME.
