Who remembers when...

Steve Vai

Endurance Guy: Tolerates most of us.
The power of a good lawyer is pretty insane. If anyone is following what's going on with RUSA right now. A person was killed during a Brevet in Texas. A car just veered into a group like the Miami incident.

The deceased spouse's lawyer got RUSA events pulled temporarily. Sued the driver, the organizer of the event, the bicycle manufacturer, and RUSA.

You fill out a waiver becoming a member, much like USAC. You then sign a waiver at every event, much like USAC. It means absolutely nothing.
 

rick81721

Lothar
The power of a good lawyer is pretty insane. If anyone is following what's going on with RUSA right now. A person was killed during a Brevet in Texas. A car just veered into a group like the Miami incident.

The deceased spouse's lawyer got RUSA events pulled temporarily. Sued the driver, the organizer of the event, the bicycle manufacturer, and RUSA.

You fill out a waiver becoming a member, much like USAC. You then sign a waiver at every event, much like USAC. It means absolutely nothing.

Will probably never find out, but in that accident in our town, I still think the family of the guy in the back of the line that got killed will try to sue the lead rider.
 

Dajerseyrat

Well-Known Member
The victim mentality where people seek to blame someone else for all their problems in life is what plagues our society and ruins all the fun for us. People want to sue, lawyers find the legal loopholes within waivers and peoples own ignorance and capitalize off it... The more and more I see of people, the more I realize why Noah only let animals on the Ark....
 

trailhead

JORBA: Wildcat/Splitrock
JORBA.ORG
You fill out a waiver becoming a member, much like USAC. You then sign a waiver at every event, much like USAC. It means absolutely nothing.

Right....but the insurance companies make you collect them anyway...in the event of a claim....if you fail to produce the needed waiver...they hit the organization up for a $5K-10K deductible...before defending you.
 

rick81721

Lothar
The victim mentality where people seek to blame someone else for all their problems in life is what plagues our society and ruins all the fun for us. People want to sue, lawyers find the legal loopholes within waivers and peoples own ignorance and capitalize off it... The more and more I see of people, the more I realize why Noah only let animals on the Ark....

Yep, personal responsibility seems to be a thing of the past
 

graveyardman67

Well-Known Member
Team MTBNJ Halter's
I happened to take a pic of this shirt a couple years ago... I think that was year 2 or 3 for me at that race.
Like a few others here, started in Ringwood, Ramapo Res, Splitrock on rigid with toe straps. Actually, my first MTB was a BMX bike I would ride to the old castle at Ramapo (maybe '86).
Canaan.jpg

First real MTB '88 Mongoose Tomac Signature. I still have it with custom paint; in pieces though.
Tomac.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 11822443_10207493832492857_55764676515667315_n.jpg
    11822443_10207493832492857_55764676515667315_n.jpg
    89.8 KB · Views: 59
  • 1543514405130.png
    1543514405130.png
    339.7 KB · Views: 58

ChrisG

Unapologetic Lifer for Rock and Roll
First real MTB '88 Mongoose Tomac Signature. I still have it with custom paint; in pieces though.
tomac-jpg.81753
Fillet brazed steel?

I have one of these in my basement, repainted and no decals, complete with a Tange fork and a LX/DX 7 speed build.

I'm not the original owner, though he and I got into the sport around the same time.
 
Last edited:

KenS

JORBA: Director
JORBA.ORG
ok - i'll take the bait on this one.

Ugh, me too. =)

Our tort laws are not so different compared to the rest of the US. We have a larger volume of cases filed than the national average and our statute of limitations is a bit longer than many states. Where we really differ though, is we have a huge population density, particularly in the NY Metro Area. We rank #1 nationwide in many population density related stats, including percentage of "urban land" at over 39% of our total landmass. Less open space, more people, more injuries, more judges, more attorneys, more cases.

Remember that negligence is an unintentional tort, but can hold a person liable for their actions. In many cases that is a good thing. It must be proven that a duty of care was owed to the plaintiff, there was a breach of that duty, there was an injury to the plaintiff caused by the defendant, and that the defendant’s act was the proximate cause of the injury. Anyone building features on land that is not theirs without permission should read this a few times. On a side note, read the opinion on Palsgraf vs. the LIRR. Determining proximate cause, and where it ends, is really interesting.

Look into NJ tort claims won despite a participant's assumed risk in sport/recreational activities. I have not found precedent. Successful claims involve true negligence on the part of the landowner. Our landowner liability act is actually pretty solid. Some info on the act is pasted at the end of this post.

The pump track case was not won by the plaintiff, it was settled by the insurance company. Super common in personal injury cases. I will gladly share my personal feelings on this case in person. There is much more to it, and many lessons were learned regarding exposure to risk and relations with land managers.

So what does all of this mean and where am I going with it? From a NJ land managers perspective, it is much easier to be a little more risk adverse when it comes to things like technical trail features on public trails in a state such as ours. It takes more work to develop and maintain those features by all involved, from the advocate to the land manager. Bentonville did not happen over night. WVP did not always allow TTF's. Both happened because people did the necessary work to see the project through. Building is the easy part, both in Bentonville and in NJ.

Bentonville has very similar recreational use liability protections for landowners as NJ does. Some differences are that they have less people, more space, they advocated heavily for their trails, put in the hard work to make it happen, and have a wonderful situation with the Walton Foundation helping to fund the overall effort. In NJ we are seeing less trail maintenance hours, less volunteerism in general, and in some spots more features popping up without landowner permission. We have worked for decades on advocacy efforts which put us on equal footing with other stakeholders, but often deal with the same old issues in this area. Step forward, step back, repeat. Our own worst enemy?

New Jersey Landowner Liability Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:42A-2

The purpose of the Act is to induce landowners (where used in this article, the term landowner also includes lessees and occupants) to make their properties available for sport or recreational activities by limiting the tort liability these owners might otherwise face under the common law. “Sport and recreational activities” is defined to include hunting, fishing, horseback riding, hiking, camping, and other outdoor recreational activities.

The Act provides that a landowner owes no special duty to keep his or her property safe for entry or use by others for sport and recreational activities, or to warn persons entering for such purposes of hazardous conditions of the land. The Act also provides that a landowner who gives permission to another to enter upon his or her property for a sport or recreational activity does not thereby (1) extend any assurance that the property is safe for such purpose; (2) change the person’s status to that of an “invitee” (to whom a higher duty of care is owed); or (3) assume responsibility or incur liability for that person’s acts that cause injury to another or damage to property. These limitations on liability apply to public and private entities alike.

The Act’s limitations on liability also apply, in varying degrees, to the following: (1) farmers who grant permission to bike, horseback ride, or operate a snowmobile or allterrain vehicle on their properties; (2) the owners of premises upon which public access has been required as a condition of a regulatory approval of, or by agreement with, the Department of Environmental Protection; and (3) the owners of premises on which a conservation restriction is held by the State, a local unit (e.g. a municipality), a charitable conservancy, or premises upon which public access is allowed pursuant to a public pathway or trail easement held by one of these entities.

The Act does not, however, limit liability in the following circumstances: (1) willful or malicious failure to guard or warn against a dangerous condition or activity; (2) injury suffered where permission to engage in recreational activities was granted for a consideration (i.e., in exchange for something of value, such as money), other than a consideration paid to the landowner by the State; or (3) injury caused by someone engaged in recreational activity to someone who is on the property for the landowner’s personal affairs.
 

KenS

JORBA: Director
JORBA.ORG
You fill out a waiver becoming a member, much like USAC. You then sign a waiver at every event, much like USAC. It means absolutely nothing.

False. Waivers establish a contract between the organization and participant which attempts to absolve the organizer from liability for injuries resulting from the known, or unknown, dangers of participating. It also serves as a warning to the participant of those dangers.

Waivers assist the insurance company, attorneys and adjusters in assessing the case, which ultimately decides the defense. Hence the lost deductible Norm mentioned which penalizes the insured if they did not obtain a waiver.

By no means do waivers completely insulate someone from liability, and they shouldn't, but they are valuable in the defense of the case.
 

Steve Vai

Endurance Guy: Tolerates most of us.
False. Waivers establish a contract between the organization and participant which attempts to absolve the organizer from liability for injuries resulting from the known, or unknown, dangers of participating. It also serves as a warning to the participant of those dangers.

Waivers assist the insurance company, attorneys and adjusters in assessing the case, which ultimately decides the defense. Hence the lost deductible Norm mentioned which penalizes the insured if they did not obtain a waiver.

By no means do waivers completely insulate someone from liability, and they shouldn't, but they are valuable in the defense of the case.

I meant it's useless as far as protecting the Organizer from a Lawsuit. Anyone can claim basically anything they want as negligence. No one was negligent in any way in this instance. A random car drove off the road into a group of cyclists. But alas, here we are.
 

stb222

Love Drunk
Jerk Squad
Ugh, me too. =)

Our tort laws are not so different compared to the rest of the US. We have a larger volume of cases filed than the national average and our statute of limitations is a bit longer than many states. Where we really differ though, is we have a huge population density, particularly in the NY Metro Area. We rank #1 nationwide in many population density related stats, including percentage of "urban land" at over 39% of our total landmass. Less open space, more people, more injuries, more judges, more attorneys, more cases.

Remember that negligence is an unintentional tort, but can hold a person liable for their actions. In many cases that is a good thing. It must be proven that a duty of care was owed to the plaintiff, there was a breach of that duty, there was an injury to the plaintiff caused by the defendant, and that the defendant’s act was the proximate cause of the injury. Anyone building features on land that is not theirs without permission should read this a few times. On a side note, read the opinion on Palsgraf vs. the LIRR. Determining proximate cause, and where it ends, is really interesting.

Look into NJ tort claims won despite a participant's assumed risk in sport/recreational activities. I have not found precedent. Successful claims involve true negligence on the part of the landowner. Our landowner liability act is actually pretty solid. Some info on the act is pasted at the end of this post.

The pump track case was not won by the plaintiff, it was settled by the insurance company. Super common in personal injury cases. I will gladly share my personal feelings on this case in person. There is much more to it, and many lessons were learned regarding exposure to risk and relations with land managers.

So what does all of this mean and where am I going with it? From a NJ land managers perspective, it is much easier to be a little more risk adverse when it comes to things like technical trail features on public trails in a state such as ours. It takes more work to develop and maintain those features by all involved, from the advocate to the land manager. Bentonville did not happen over night. WVP did not always allow TTF's. Both happened because people did the necessary work to see the project through. Building is the easy part, both in Bentonville and in NJ.

Bentonville has very similar recreational use liability protections for landowners as NJ does. Some differences are that they have less people, more space, they advocated heavily for their trails, put in the hard work to make it happen, and have a wonderful situation with the Walton Foundation helping to fund the overall effort. In NJ we are seeing less trail maintenance hours, less volunteerism in general, and in some spots more features popping up without landowner permission. We have worked for decades on advocacy efforts which put us on equal footing with other stakeholders, but often deal with the same old issues in this area. Step forward, step back, repeat. Our own worst enemy?
So if we build good features (on others land) that are not neglected, maintained and in intended working order, we are ok liability wise?
 

Xler8

Well-Known Member
For some things in life, representation from a lawyer is required. However if you choose to ride your bike in an off road environment then it’s on you if something doesn’t go your way. If you get hurt then it’s no one else’s fault but your own. You can say it was improperly maintained, but who defines what is and is not proper? It’s not too much different than going skiing.

Seems more like just a bunch of people trying to make a quick buck.

Let’s look at this example... there’s a small skinny feature in CR. If I ride on it, fall and hurt myself, should I be entitled to a payout? Fuck no. Doesn’t matter if wasn’t maintained. It was my choice to ride up it and if I suck that bad and fall off it, then that’s on me. Not the person/people who put it there nor the people who maintain it. No one points a gun to your head and says you have to do ride this or that, it’s totally on you. That’s just my take and it may be different from the letter of the law, but that may be because the letters were written by people who had a different agenda in mind.
 

KenS

JORBA: Director
JORBA.ORG
I meant it's useless as far as protecting the Organizer from a Lawsuit. Anyone can claim basically anything they want as negligence. No one was negligent in any way in this instance. A random car drove off the road into a group of cyclists. But alas, here we are.

Debatable, but I hear you. Organizers should not see a waiver as lawsuit protection, more as lawsuit defense. More importantly, they should be considering what could happen during the event and take action to control the risks.

The RUSA case is a real bummer. I'm curious to see where it goes. You've said it before about murder by car vs. bike, and this seems like another instance of it.
 
Top Bottom