Stimson

Stimson v. Carlson

Good Law
11 Cal. App. 4th 1201·14 Cal. Rptr. 2d 670·1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1469·92 Daily Journal DAR 17161·1993 A.M.C. 1049
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 21, 1992A054890California1,630 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reardon, J.

Appellant Michael R. Stimson appeals after summary judgment was granted in favor of respondent Thomas Carlson in Stimson’s action for negligence arising from injuries sustained in a sailboat accident. Stimson contends that (i) the doctrine of assumption of the risk does not bar his cause of action, and (2) even if the defense might bar recovery, a triable issue of fact exists precluding summary judgment. In June 1992, we affirmed the judgment in an unpublished opinion. Thereafter, our Supreme Court issued its decision in Knight v. Jewett (1992) 3 Cal.4th 296 [ 11 Cal.Rptr.2d 2 , 834 R2d 696], and we have been directed to vacate and reconsider in light of that decision. Having reconsidered our earlier opinion in light of subsequent case law, we again affirm the judgment.

I. Facts

Respondent Thomas Carlson owned a 35-foot J-class sailboat, the “Cosmic Muffin.” On July 26, 1987, Carlson and his six-person crew, including appellant Michael R. Stimson, were sailing on San Francisco Bay. Stimson was an experienced sailor. He had sailed with Carlson at least 15 times and had been a member of Carlson’s crew in 9 or 10 sailing competitions. He knew that there are many dangers…

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.