Saffro

Saffro v. Elite Racing, Inc.

Bad Law
119 Cal. Rptr. 2d 497·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4076·2002 Daily Journal DAR 5009·98 Cal. App. 4th 173·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3941
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 7, 2002D037591California2,606 words

Opinion

Opinion

McINTYRE, J.

In this case we conclude that the organizer of a marathon has a duty to produce a reasonably safe event. This duty requires it to take reasonable steps to “minimize the risks without altering the nature of the sport”—which includes providing sufficient water and electrolyte replacement drinks as represented in the informational materials provided to the participants. (See Knight v. Jewett (1992) 3 Cal.4th 296, 317 [ 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2 , 834 P.2d 696 ].)

Richard Saffro appeals from a summary judgment entered against him on his complaint against Elite Racing, Inc. (Elite) for negligence and negligent supervision in connection with the 1998 “Suzuki Rock ‘N’ Roll Marathon” in San Diego. Saffro contends the judgment should be reversed because the trial court erred in (1) ruling his suit was barred by the doctrine of primary assumption of risk; (2) excluding the declarations of three race participants; and (3) denying his motion for reconsideration. We agree with Saffro’s first contention and find there are issues of material fact on the questions of breach of duty and causation. Thus, we reverse the judgment. This renders Safffo’s second and third contentions moot.

Factual and…

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.