Ah but no waiver in the land protects against true negligence and it could be argued via the behavior of horses, that this chute design is negligent.
2 Likes
How many horses went through it fine, for how many years?
One car accident does not make a dangerous intersection.
5 Likes
How is it negligent? Upon further research it is padded, it is wide enough for the horse to turn, and countless horses have run down it. The ground is safe inside of it, it is manned by at least 4 people, and every panel is clear of rust and sharp edges. Negligence isnât determined on a singular accident.
1 Like
How is it negligent?
its design is not safe
Just because the Space Shuttle was successfully launched and recover multipliable times did not make the boosterâs O rings safe, it was a design fault. Thiokol, which also was a Nevada company was found negligent
Program safety engineers were aware of the engineering rationale that accepted risk, even as the O-rings showed increasing erosion, heat damage, and exhaust gas blowby.
So back to that chute if the chute is safe why have they installed padding on the corner post? To me that shows they believed it to be a risk.
4 Likes
Okay, letâs go with your logic for a minute.
They pad the goal post for an NFL game.
What if a player runs into it and hurts themselves? They must have known it was a danger to the player.
Might as well remove the goal post so the players donât get hurt.
Does the alleyway suck? Sure does.
But if you would tally the number of barrel runs that has happened at the T&M since 1985, weâre looking at roughly almost 400 runs. And how many times has someone injured themselves on that corner? I have no idea but if you try to statistically argue that the setup is negligence and seek to sue over that, no court is going to award you anything based on an extremely low percentage rate. (Endless climb has a good analogy above with car accidents and an intersection.)
No different that a bull rider getting banged against the chute.
Or a team roperâs horse getting caught in the barrier line (doesnât happen often but Iâve seen some nasty wrecks from that).
Or a saddle bronc rider getting bucked off into the chutes.
etc.
etc.
etc.
Rodeo is extremely dangerous.
Are you going to call everything negligent? Where do you draw the line?
Your argument doesnât make any sense.
1 Like
yes there are inherent risks in equine activities, the goal is to minimize the risks by removing hazards
the âpostâ is a Residual risk
1 Like
Thereâs an intersection near my house that everyone acknowledges is dangerous. We were told by the mayor, that they wonât put in a light unless someone else dies. One death wasnât enough, let alone the number of accidents they have had in the meantime.
1 Like
I live right by an intersection like this. At least one accident a week, 20 fatalities in the last 8 years is what the city has reported.
No light. No lawsuit.
That lawsuit might win in some places.
I knew of a case where a kid trespassed into a fenced backyard and got bitten by the dog. Sued and won.
Lawsuits are often inexplicable. Thatâs why coffee cups have a hot beverage warning.
Oh here comes the hot coffee reference. That lawsuit is way more complicated than âhot coffeeâ but knock yourself out.
4 Likes
Ok.
