 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Mason v. Komlo3/1/1993
NADER, Judge.
This appeal has been placed upon the court's accelerated calendar and has been submitted to the court upon briefs of counsel.
Appellant, Penny S. Mason, appeals from a directed verdict in her suit for damages resulting from a personal injury incurred while riding a horse named "Jack." The accident occurred on July 31, 1988, when "Jack" bolted towards the barn, actually running inside the barn, skidding and slipping, and then abruptly stopping. Appellant was thrown over the horse's shoulder, hit a wall, and suffered severe injuries to her face and arm.
Appllees, Edward and William Komlo, own and operate Aurora Stables, a stable where persons board their horses. Appellant met appellee Edward Komlo in July 1988, and expressed her interest in riding and learning more about horses. Edward Komlo invited appellant to come to the stables, and subsequently testified at trial, that he offered appellant an opportunity to manage the stables after hearing appellant describe her work history. (Allegedly appellant had stated that she worked at several stables in the past and previously managed another stable.)
Appellant rode almost daily during the time period between July 19, 1988 and July 31, 1988. She rode an older pleasure horse named "Frosty," then appellant rode "Son of Sunset," with appellee Edward Komlo "ponying" the horse. ("Ponying" is the act of leading the horse with another gentler horse as a means of calming and controlling the horse being led). Appellant first rode "Jack" two weeks before the accident, with "Jack" being "ponied" by Barbara Keener. Barbara Keener took appellant to the "back-track," an open area behind the barn with a pond and a sand track. Appellant then rode "Jack" in the back paddock, a one-acre fenced-in field. The third time appellant rode "Jack," she rode in the back paddock, and then she rode "Jack" several times in a four-acre fenced-in area. On July 31, 1988, appellant asked to ride "Jack." It was suggested that she ride in the back paddock, but appellant asked to take "Jack" to the "back track." The sequence of events were then related to the court by appellant as follows:
"When I left the track, I was walking - we were going to come back down the road; we were going to skirt the field, and I was going to walk him, and he wanted to go a little bit faster, and I didn't want to, and I turned him around a little bit, and I let him trot, and he broke the trot and went into a canter, and I stopped him, and he kept on pulling at me, and it was getting more difficult, and I got off and I walked him around, and he acted like he wasn't interested in going back anymore. He wanted to eat and just follow me around.
"So I got back on and as I was getting back on him, I had my left foot in the stirrup, getting myself up to go over and sit down, and he bolted. I wasn't even on him yet, and he took off. And I was getting my other foot in, trying to hang on to him, stop him, to turn him either way I could - he was heading right for the pond, when he swung off to the left and was running toward the barn * * *."
Jack did not stop until he was well inside the barn, and, when he finally stopped, appellant was thrown over his shoulder and severely injured.
On November 16, 1989, appellant brought suit against Edward and William Komlo, d.b.a. Aurora Stables, alleging that appellee Edward Komlo breached his duty to "warn [appellant] that Jack had dangerous propensities and to prevent from riding Jack," and his duty "of assuring that the riding equipment was properly put on Jack."
Appellees filed a motion for summary judgment, and the trial court awarded
Page 1 2 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|