A federal judge in the Eastern District of Tennessee has denied a motion for summary judgment brought by USA Gymnastics, United States Gymnastics Federation and other defendants, finding that the parents of a gymnast, who died while competing in a competition, did not forgo their rights to sue the defendants when they signed a waiver.
The accident in question occurred on January 17, 2004 during the John Macready Flip Fest Invitational in Knoxville, Tennessee. Gymnast Jordan Bonne was competing in a trampoline event when he fell off the trampoline and hit his head on the concrete floor. He died two days later from his injuries.
The gymnast’s parents sued Premier Athletics, which was the host organization, sponsor and facilitator of the event, as well as USA Gymnastics (USAG) and the United States Gymnastics Federation (USGF), which are the sport’s national governing bodies for the sport of gymnastics in the United States.
The defendants moved to dismiss the case on the basis of multiple waivers signed by the parents. Considering this argument, the court first reviewed the waiver signed on the membership form of USAG, which reads:
“WAIVER AND RELEASE. I am fully aware of and appreciate the risks, including the risk of catastrophic injury, paralysis, and even death, as well as other damages and losses associated with participation in a gymnastics event. I further agree that USA Gymnastics, the host organization, and sponsor(s) of any USA Gymnastics sanctioned event, along with the employees, agents, officers and directors of the organization, shall not be liable for any losses or damages occurred as a result of my participation in the event, except for such loss or damage as the result of the intentional or reckless conduct of one of the organizations or individuals identified above.”
The parents also signed other waivers that were proffered by other defendants in the case.
The defendants argued that Ohio law should apply to the interpretation and consideration of the waivers since the plaintiffs reside in Ohio. However, the plaintiffs countered that the waivers were signed in Kentucky, where the gym is located.
In considering this discrepancy, the federal judge turned to Hataway v. McKinley, 830 S.W.2d 53 (Tenn. 1992), a Tennessee Supreme Court case that adopted the “most significant relationship” approach of the Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws, § 175, to determine the rights and liabilities of the parties in a wrongful death case.
Specifically, Section 175 provides: “In an action for wrongful death, the local law of the state where the injury occurred determines the rights and liabilities of the parties unless, with respect to the particular issue, some other state has a more significant relationship under the principles stated in § 6 to the occurrence and the parties, to which event the local law of the other state will be applied.”
The court continued that “it is clear that Tennessee is the state that has the ‘most significant relationship’ with the parties in this case. Thus, Tennessee choice of law rules dictate that Tennessee tort law applies.
“In Childress v. Madison County, 777 S.W.2d 1 (Tenn.App. 1989), the Tennessee Court of Appeals noted that “[t]he general rule is that a guardian may not waive the rights of an infant or an incompetent.” Id. at 6 [*14] (citing 39 Am.Jur.2d Guardian & Ward, § 102 (1968); 42 Am.Jur.2d Infants § 152 (1969)). As in Childress, Jordan’s rights could not be contracted away by his mother in the State of Tennessee. It is Tennessee’s stated public policy to protect minors and prohibit exculpatory releases for them. Mrs. Bonne could not execute a valid release or exculpatory clause as to the rights of her son against USAG, or anyone else, and to the extent the parties to the release attempted and intended to so do, the release is void.
“Moreover, exculpatory clauses purporting to contract against liability for intentional conduct, recklessness or gross negligence are unenforceable. See Childress, 777 S.W.2d at 5; Adams v. Roark, 686 S.W.2d 73 (Tenn. 1985). Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges defendants’ failure to provide a safe environment, failure to utilize trained spotters, and failure to ensure sufficient safety matting, all constitute gross negligence and reckless conduct. Defendants have not challenged these allegations in their motion for summary judgment. Thus, accepting plaintiffs’ allegations as true, the release at issue here would not shield defendants for liability for their gross negligence and reckless conduct. Accordingly, defendants’ motion for summary judgment based on the waiver and release will be denied.”
Matthew R. Bonne, et al. v. Premier Athletics, LLC, et al.; E.D. Tenn.; No. 3:04-CV-440; 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77802; 10/23/06
Attorneys of Record: (for plaintiffs) Stephen E Yeager, Lowe & Yeager, Knoxville, TN. (for defendants) John W Baker, Jr, Baker, O’Kane, Atkins & Thompson, Knoxville, TN. And Samuel W Rutherford, Stokes & Rutherford, Knoxville, TN.
