|
Court
News Ohio
Woman
Hit By Hockey Puck Loses Court of Claims
Case
By Jenna
Gant
August
15, 2013
Emily
Austin v. Miami University, Case No. 2013-00078
A
woman struck on the head by a hockey puck
during a pre-game warm up at Miami University lost her liability claim
this
week. Emily Austin was seeking $200 in medical expenses from the
school, the
cost of her insurance policy’s deductible.
Miami
University denied liability stating
Austin had assumed the risk of being struck by a hockey puck when she
entered
the hockey arena on November 9, 2012. The school noted that
the “hockey
arena is protected by 8’ boards and end zone nets equal to or greater
than the
standard hockey arenas.” The school also said it frequently makes
public
announcements during games warning spectators of possible flying pucks.
Austin
responded that she was hit by the hockey puck before the game started.
In
the decision released August 13, the Court
of Claims cited Cincinnati Baseball Club Co. V. Eno, 112 Ohio
St. 175, 147
N.E. 86 (1925) when it compared Austin’s claim to a case where
a plaintiff
was injured by a baseball hit into the stands. “It is well settled that
spectators attending baseball games who are injured by batted balls
flying into
the stands are denied recovery based on the primary assumption of the
risk
doctrine,” the court said.
The
Court of Claims applied the three-part test
for primary assumption of risk, which requires “1) the danger
is ordinary
to the game; 2) it is common knowledge that the danger exists; and 3)
the
injury occurs as a result of the danger during the course of the game.”
The
court said it finds no inherent difference between baseball and hockey
when
applying the assumption of risk doctrine.
“There
is no obligation on the part of the
operator of a hockey game such as M.U. to protect a spectator against
being hit
by a flying puck ... Evidence has shown defendant did take measures by
erecting
glass and boards around the perimeter of the Ice Arena to provide some
safety
to spectators from errant pucks. Nevertheless, pucks do enter the
stands; an
inherent risk in the game of hockey, which is common, expected, and
frequent,”
the court said. “Consequently, plaintiff’s claim is denied since
defendant owed
her no duty to protect her from the known danger presented.”
The
Court of Claims has original jurisdiction
to hear and determine all civil actions filed against the State of Ohio
and its
agencies.
|
