The Court of Appeals recently held that Georgia’s assumption of the risk doctrine applied in a case where a teenager was injured while “car surfing” on a friend’s automobile. Teems v. Bates, 2009 WL 2902487 (Ga.App. Sept. 11, 2009). Assumption of the risk is a complete defense in a lawsuit alleging negligence.
Late one night, three friends drove to a church parking lot where Teems suggested that she and Mercurio “surf” on Bates’s car. Mercurio was reluctant and told Teems that she thought it was dangerous. Nevertheless, the two agreed to do it and Bates told them he would be careful driving around while they lied on top of his car. After Teems and Mercurio took their positions on the roof of the car, Bates began driving at a speed of 10-15 miles per hour. When he made a sharp right-hand turn, Teems was thrown from the car and onto the pavement, resulting in severe injuries.
When Teems sued Bates for negligence, Bates responded that Teems assumed the risk of injury and that she was therefore barred from recovery. In Georgia, the assumption of the risk defense applies if the plaintiff (1) had actual knowledge of the danger, (2) understood and appreciated the risks associated with the danger, and (3) voluntarily exposed himself to those risks. When a person voluntarily participates in an obviously dangerous activity, that person necessarily assumes the risks attendant to that activity. Here, the Court held that car surfing constituted an inherently dangerous activity that posed obvious risks to anyone who participated, and despite being made aware of the danger, Teems voluntarily chose to expose herself to it.
Interestingly, the Court likened car surfing to an amusement park thrill ride, where a person accepts the risks generated by normal changes in speed and direction. Therefore, when Teems agreed to car surf, she assumed the risks of changes in speed and direction, including the risk that she would fall off the moving vehicle. Therefore, because Teems assumed the risk of injury by engaging in an obviously dangerous activity, she was precluded from recovering damages, and a verdict for the defendant was affirmed.
For more information, please contact Timothy Buckley III, Esq. at (404) 633-9230.