Chavez

Chavez v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc.

Good Law
189 Cal. Rptr. 3d 449·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 598·238 Cal. App. 4th 632
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 8, 2015H040987California5,241 words

Opinion

Opinion

Walsh, J.

Plaintiffs Stacey and Ruben Chavez appeal from a judgment entered in favor of defendant 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. (24 Hour), after the trial court granted 24 Hour’s motion for summary judgment. Stacey suffered a traumatic brain injury while exercising at one of 24 Hour’s facilities in San Jose, California. She and her husband, Ruben, who sought recovery for loss of consortium, sued 24 Hour for ordinary and gross negligence, premises liability, and strict products liability.

On appeal, plaintiffs contend there is a triable issue of fact as to whether 24 Hour was grossly negligent. We agree and shall reverse.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

Stacey became a member of 24 Hour’s Parkmoor facility on January 3, 2011. On that date, she signed a membership agreement that included a release of liability. Under the release provision, Stacey agreed, among other things, that 24 Hour would not be liable for any injury she suffered as a result of 24 Hour’s negligence.

Stacey was injured oh February 28, 2011, when the back panel of a “FreeMotion” cable crossover machine (cross-trainer) struck her in the head at the 24 Hour’s Parkmoor facility. As a result of the traumatic brain…

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.