 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Holzer v. Dakota Speedway5/17/2000
v. Deseret Enterprises, Inc., 381 A2d 164, 167 (PaSuper1977)).
[ ] The release Holzer signed in this case does not involve a matter of public interest, but rather, a private agreement between individuals. Such a release has very little, if any, negative impact on the general population. See Grbac v. Reading Fair Co., Inc., 521 FSupp 1351, 1355 (WDPa 1981) (concluding "a release in an agreement concerning participation in an automobile race does not contravene any policy of the law."). "We are dealing with a fairly narrow segment of the public participating in a relatively dangerous sporting activity. The general public as a whole is minimally affected." Tope, 265 NW2d at 764. Nor does this case involve a utility or other quasi-public entity that supplies essential services. Id. at 765.
[ ] Holzer participated in Speedway automobile races as a form of recreation -- his livelihood did not depend on working as a member of a pit crew, as he served as a nonpaid volunteer for the Bortnem racing team. Grbac, 521 Fsupp at 1355. Thus, Holzer was not compelled in any way to enter the Speedway pit area. See Gervasi v. Holland Raceway, Inc., 334 NYS2d 527, 529 (NYAppDiv 1972) (rejecting the argument that a release was unenforceable as violative of public policy when racing mechanics were not employees of the defendant racetrack, and they could have refused to participate in the race or to sign the release); Gore, 407 FSupp at 492 (noting that "participation in automobile races and other sporting events is a voluntary undertaking."). If Holzer's recreational enjoyment was achieved from viewing a race, he could have entered the grandstands as a spectator and would not have been subject to the release he signed to become a member of a pit crew.
[ ] There is no public policy in this state against race promoters being afforded some contractual protection for sponsoring automobile racing, an inherently dangerous sport. Lee, 337 NW2d at 828. We agree with the court in Grbac, when it stated: "fewer promoters would be willing to hold automobile races if courts refused to permit them to limit their exposure to liability for racetrack accidents, in what is undeniably a dangerous sport." 521 FSupp at 1355; see also Gore, 407 FSupp at 492 (stating " f these agreements, ... were not upheld, the effect would be to increase the liability of those organizing or sponsoring such events to such an extent that no one would be willing to undertake to sponsor [them]."). We find the release in this case does not violate public policy.
[ ] B. Knowledge and Voluntariness.
[ ] Holzer also contends that whether he knowingly and voluntarily signed the release is a question of fact for the jury. "To be valid, a release must be fairly and knowingly made." Johnson, 514 NW2d at 697 (citing Paterek v. 6600 Ltd., 186 MichApp 445, 465 NW2d 342, 344 (1990)). However, we commence analysis of this claim mindful of our holding that "one who accepts a contract is conclusively presumed to know its contents and to assent to them, in the absence of fraud, misrepresentation or other wrongful act by another contracting party." LPN Trust v. Farrar, 1996 SD 97, , 552 NW2d 796, 799 (citing Flynn v. Lockhart, 526 NW2d 743, 746 (SD 1995) (quoting 17A AmJur2d Contracts ยง 224 (1991))).
[ ] Holzer claims he was given no "meaningful opportunity to read the agreement before signing ." He relies heavily on Eder v. Lake Geneva Raceway, 523 NW2d 429 (Wisc 1994) for this contention. Eder involved two spectators who, after being required to sign a release and waiver of liability before entering a raceway, were injured when a motorbike left the racetrack and struck each of them. 523 NW2d at 430-31. The court rev
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 South Dakota Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|