In reference to the case in the text, Swigart v. Bruno, what was the court's assessment with regards to the risk associated with riding horses in the American Endurance Ride Conference which was described as an "equestrian athletic event?"

A) The court ruled that under contributive negligence principles, Swigart was entitled to recover.
B) The court ruled that under pure comparative negligence principles, Swigart was entitled to recover.
C) The court ruled that under modified comparative negligence principles, Swigart was entitled to recover.
D) The court ruled that Swigart was entitled to recover damages, however, remanded the case to determine whether or not Swigart was really injured.
E) The court ruled that the assumption of risk doctrine applies to Swigart's claims and he could therefore not recover.

Question

Inser Wandlkowski · Accepted Answer

Final Answer : E, Explanation :  The court ruled that the assumption of risk doctrine applies, indicating that Swigart voluntarily took on the known risks associated with participating in an equestrian athletic event, and therefore could not recover damages for the injuries sustained.

Definitions

Learning Objectives

Learning Objectives

Related questions