Ordway

Ordway v. Superior Court

Good Law
198 Cal. App. 3d 98·1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 255·243 Cal. Rptr. 536
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 1988G005171California5,341 words

Opinion

Opinion

Crosby, J.

Does reasonable implied assumption of risk remain a viable defense after the adoption of comparative fault? We hold it does.

I

Judy Casella, a veteran jockey who had ridden in 500 professional horse races without incident, was thrown from her mount and further injured when the equine fell and rolled over her during a quarterhorse race at Los Alamitos Race Course on January 3, 1983. The tragic chain of events began when Over Shadow, owned by petitioner Homer Ordway, tangled with another steed, Speedy Ball, who then stumbled in front of Casella’s horse. The California Horse Racing Board determined the jockey riding Over Shadow violated a board rule by “crossing over without sufficient clearance, causing interference,” and he was suspended for five racing days. Alleging “negligence, carelessness and unlawful conduct,” Casella sued the riders, trainers, and owners of Over Shadow and Speedy Ball.

Ordway moved for summary judgment. The motion was denied, and Ordway sought extraordinary relief in this court. We denied the writ application, and he petitioned the Supreme Court. That court granted review and, citing Turcotte v. Fell (1986) 68 N.Y.ld 432 [ 510 N.Y.S.2d 49 , 502…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.