Naomi Mizushima v. Sunset Ranch, Inc.
Nevada Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By the Court,
Steffen, J.:
The primary issue of this appeal is whether and to what extent the doctrine of assumption of risk remains a viable defense to a tort action for negligence in the State of Nevada. We conclude that the variety of assumption of risk here present is subsumed within Nevada’s law of comparative negligence. Accordingly, the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.
The factual predicate for the action filed by the injured plaintiff-appellant, Naomi Mizushima, against defendant-respondent Sunset Ranch, Inc. (Sunset) and defendant Travel Systems,…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Nga Li v. Yellow Cab Co.California Supreme Court · 1975
- Farley v. MM Cattle CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1975
- Anderson v. CeccardiOhio Supreme Court · 1983
- Rutter v. Northeastern Beaver County School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Blackburn v. DortaSupreme Court of Florida · 1977
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Murray v. Ramada Inns, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1988
- Turner v. Mandalay Sports Entertainment, LLCNevada Supreme Court · 2008
- Perez v. McConkeyTennessee Supreme Court · 1994
- King v. Kayak Manufacturing Corp.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1989
- Davenport v. Cotton Hope Plantation Horizontal Property RegimeSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1998
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.