Equine Law Blog
Ron Turcotte rose to fame after winning Thoroughbred racing’s Triple Crown riding the legendary “Secretariat.” He lost his own legal battle in New York after being seriously injured in a horse race, mainly because of New York’s doctrine of “assumption of risk.” Assumption of risk is a legal defense based on the theory that horse racing is an inherently dangerous sport and professional jockeys or drivers are best situated to know and appreciate the risks involved in the sport.
In the Turcotte case, Ron Turcotte was rendered a paraplegic after 17 years of professional horse racing after falling from a horse at Belmont Park during a race. He sued several parties, including a jockey whose horse allegedly clipped the horse Turcotte rode causing it to fall and the owner of the horse ridden by that jockey. Affirming summary judgment for the defendants, however, New York's highest court held that the defendants did not owe Turcotte a duty of care. It stated in part:
[W]hile the determination of the existence of a duty and the concomitant scope of that duty involve a consideration not only of the wrongfulness of the defendant's action or inaction, they also necessitate an examination of plaintiff's reasonable expectations of the care owed him by others. This is particularly true in professional sporting contests, which by their nature involve an elevated degree of danger. If a participant makes an informed estimate of the risks involved in the activity and willingly undertakes them, then there can be no liability if he is injured as a result of those risks.
Traditionally, the participant's conduct was conveniently analyzed in terms of the defensive doctrine of assumption of risk. With the enactment of the comparative negligence statute, however, assumption of risk is no longer an absolute defense [citation omitted]. Thus, it has become necessary, and quite proper, when measuring a defendant's duty to a plaintiff to consider the risks assumed by the plaintiff. . . . Accordingly, the analysis of care owed to plaintiff in the professional sporting event by a co-participant . . . must be evaluated by considering the risks plaintiff assumed when he elected to participate in the event and how those assumed risks qualified defendants' duty to him.
Dismissal was also affirmed because Turcotte’s testimony acknowledging risks inherent in racing supported an "express assumption of risk" on his part.
The Case was: Turcotte v. Fell, 68 N.Y.2d 432; 510 N.Y.S.2d 49; 502 N.E.2d 964 (N.Y. 1986).
Every legal matter is different. Legal disputes can vary depending on the facts and the applicable law. Seek knowledgeable legal assistance for your matters.
ShareholderJulie Fershtman is considered to be one of the nation's leading attorneys in the field of equine law. She has successfully tried equine cases before juries in four states. A frequent author and speaker on legal issues, she has written ...
